CVE-2024-10361VulnerabilityPublished 20 Mar 2025Updated 15 Oct 2025

CVE-2024-10361: danny-avila/librechat · Path Traversal

Affects danny-avila/librechatSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.1 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

8.1High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 1.0% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 62% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: High
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 20 Mar 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubdanny-avila/librechat`pkg:github/danny-avila/librechat`Other threats	Affected =0.7.5-rc2	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-10361, organizations should first verify if they are using the affected version of danny-avila/librechat (v0.7.5-rc2 or earlier). If so, immediate steps include: 1) Restrict access to the /api/files endpoint to trusted and authenticated users only, minimizing exposure. 2) Implement strict server-side input validation and sanitization to ensure file paths cannot include traversal sequences such as '../'. 3) Enforce a whitelist approach for allowable file operations and directories, rejecting any requests targeting paths outside the designated safe directory. 4) Employ application-level logging and monitoring to detect unusual file deletion requests or patterns indicative of exploitation attempts. 5) Use containerization or sandboxing to limit the impact of potential file deletions on the host system. 6) Regularly back up critical data and system files to enable recovery in case of successful exploitation. 7) Engage with the librechat development community for patches or updates addressing this vulnerability and apply them promptly once available. 8) Conduct security audits and penetration testing focusing on file handling endpoints to identify similar weaknesses. These targeted measures go beyond generic advice by focusing on the specific nature of the path traversal and file deletion risks.

Description

An arbitrary file deletion vulnerability exists in danny-avila/librechat version v0.7.5-rc2, specifically within the /api/files endpoint. This vulnerability arises from improper input validation, allowing path traversal techniques to delete arbitrary files on the server. Attackers can exploit this to bypass security mechanisms and delete files outside the intended directory, including critical system files, user data, or application resources. This vulnerability impacts the integrity and availability of the system.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2024-10361 can be significant, especially for those relying on librechat for internal or external communications. The ability to delete arbitrary files can lead to denial of service by removing critical application or system files, loss of sensitive user data, and potential disruption of business operations. This can affect confidentiality indirectly if deletion of logs or audit trails occurs, but primarily impacts integrity and availability. Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, government, and critical infrastructure are at heightened risk due to the potential operational disruption and regulatory compliance issues arising from data loss or service outages. Additionally, the requirement for low-level privileges means that attackers who gain limited access can escalate damage without needing full administrative rights. The vulnerability could also be leveraged as part of a broader attack chain to facilitate lateral movement or persistent disruption within networks. Given the increasing adoption of open-source collaboration tools in Europe, the threat surface is expanding, necessitating proactive risk management.

CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 15 Oct 2025, 13:13 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats