CVE-2024-10707VulnerabilityPublished 20 Mar 2025Updated 15 Oct 2025

CVE-2024-10707: gaizhenbiao/chuanhuchatgpt · Path Traversal

Affects gaizhenbiao/chuanhuchatgptSource CVE Database V5

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2024-4941

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.7% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 54% 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:H/I:N/A:N

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

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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

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

AI-suggested

1. Implement strict input validation and sanitization on all JSON inputs processed by the handle_dataset_selection function, ensuring that file paths are normalized and constrained within allowed directories. 2. Employ allowlisting of file paths and reject any input that attempts directory traversal sequences such as '../'. 3. Restrict file system permissions for the application user to limit access only to necessary directories, minimizing the impact of any path traversal attempts. 4. Monitor and log all file upload activities and JSON inputs for anomalous patterns indicative of exploitation attempts. 5. If possible, isolate the gaizhenbiao/chuanhuchatgpt service in a sandboxed or containerized environment to limit the blast radius of any compromise. 6. Stay updated with vendor advisories and apply patches promptly once available. 7. Conduct regular security audits and code reviews focusing on input handling in components that process user-supplied data. 8. Educate internal users and administrators about the risks of privilege escalation and enforce the principle of least privilege to reduce the likelihood of local privilege abuse.

Description

gaizhenbiao/chuanhuchatgpt version git d4ec6a3 is affected by a local file inclusion vulnerability due to the use of the gradio component gr.JSON, which has a known issue (CVE-2024-4941). This vulnerability allows unauthenticated users to access arbitrary files on the server by uploading a specially crafted JSON file and exploiting the improper input validation in the handle_dataset_selection function.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant confidentiality risk by potentially exposing sensitive internal files, including configuration files, credentials, or proprietary data stored on servers running gaizhenbiao/chuanhuchatgpt. Given the increasing adoption of AI and chatbot frameworks in sectors such as finance, healthcare, and government, unauthorized file access could lead to data breaches, regulatory non-compliance (e.g., GDPR), and reputational damage. The requirement for local privileges reduces the risk of widespread remote exploitation but does not eliminate insider threats or risks from compromised accounts. Organizations relying on this software for internal or customer-facing services may face operational disruptions if attackers leverage this vulnerability to gather intelligence or prepare further attacks. The lack of available patches increases the urgency for immediate mitigations. Additionally, the medium severity rating suggests that while the threat is serious, it is not critical, but should still be addressed promptly to avoid escalation.

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

huntr.com/bounties/98fdedea-6ad0-4157-b7d2-ae71c9786ee8 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 15 Oct 2025, 13:16 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats