Likeshop up to 2.5.6 updateWechatInfo Avatar server-side request forgery

CVSS Meta Temp Score
CVSS is a standardized scoring system to determine possibilities of attacks. The Temp Score considers temporal factors like disclosure, exploit and countermeasures. The unique Meta Score calculates the average score of different sources to provide a normalized scoring system.
Current Exploit Price (≈)
Our analysts are monitoring exploit markets and are in contact with vulnerability brokers. The range indicates the observed or calculated exploit price to be seen on exploit markets. A good indicator to understand the monetary effort required for and the popularity of an attack.
CTI Interest Score
Our Cyber Threat Intelligence team is monitoring different web sites, mailing lists, exploit markets and social media networks. The CTI Interest Score identifies the interest of attackers and the security community for this specific vulnerability in real-time. A high score indicates an elevated risk to be targeted for this vulnerability.
4.6$0-$5k0.00

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in Likeshop up to 2.5.6. Affected by this issue is the function UserLogic::updateWechatInfo. Performing a manipulation of the argument Avatar results in server-side request forgery. This vulnerability was named CVE-2024-24028. There is no available exploit. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, was found in Likeshop up to 2.5.6. This affects the function UserLogic::updateWechatInfo. The manipulation of the argument avatar with an unknown input leads to a server-side request forgery vulnerability. CWE is classifying the issue as CWE-918. The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination. This is going to have an impact on confidentiality. The summary by CVE is:

Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Likeshop before 2.5.7 allows attackers to view sensitive information via the avatar parameter in function UserLogic::updateWechatInfo.

The weakness was presented 02/29/2024. The advisory is shared at thanhlo.substack.com. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2024-24028 since 01/25/2024. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available.

Upgrading to version 2.5.7 eliminates this vulnerability.

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Productinfo

Name

Version

CPE 2.3info

CPE 2.2info

CVSSv4info

VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv3info

VulDB Meta Base Score: 4.7
VulDB Meta Temp Score: 4.6

VulDB Base Score: 3.5
VulDB Temp Score: 3.4
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CNA Base Score: 5.9
CNA Vector: 🔍

CVSSv2info

AVACAuCIA
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
VectorComplexityAuthenticationConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

Exploitinginfo

Class: Server-side request forgery
CWE: CWE-918
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍

Physical: Partially
Local: Yes
Remote: Partially

Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined

EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍

Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍

0-DayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
TodayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Interest: 🔍
Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍

Countermeasuresinfo

Recommended: Upgrade
Status: 🔍

0-Day Time: 🔍

Upgrade: Likeshop 2.5.7

Timelineinfo

01/25/2024 🔍
02/29/2024 +35 days 🔍
02/29/2024 +0 days 🔍
11/08/2024 +253 days 🔍

Sourcesinfo

Advisory: thanhlo.substack.com
Status: Confirmed

CVE: CVE-2024-24028 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2024-24028
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-255333

Entryinfo

Created: 02/29/2024 22:50
Updated: 11/08/2024 02:16
Changes: 02/29/2024 22:50 (40), 11/08/2024 02:16 (27)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Discussion

No comments yet. Languages: en.

Please log in to comment.

◂ PreviousOverviewNext ▸

Interested in the pricing of exploits?

See the underground prices here!