VulnerabilityPublished 1 Apr 2024Updated 4 Sep 2024

CVE-2024-29435: alldata · Command Injection

Affects alldataSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 13:47 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.1Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 21% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

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

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

Attack Vector: Physical: The attack requires the attacker to physically touch or manipulate the vulnerable component. Physical interaction may be brief or persistent.
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 1 Apr 2024
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 26 Oct 2026.

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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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
npmalldata`pkg:npm/alldata`Other threats	Affected =0.4.6	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Given the absence of an official patch, organizations should implement several specific mitigations: 1) Restrict network access to Alldata instances by using firewalls and network segmentation to limit exposure to trusted users only. 2) Employ strict input validation and sanitization at the application or proxy level if possible, to filter or block malicious processId parameter values. 3) Educate users about the risks of interacting with untrusted inputs or links that could trigger the vulnerability, reducing the likelihood of successful social engineering. 4) Monitor logs and network traffic for unusual command execution patterns or suspicious processId parameter usage. 5) Use application-layer firewalls or intrusion prevention systems (IPS) with custom rules targeting command injection attempts specific to Alldata. 6) Prepare incident response plans to quickly isolate and remediate affected systems if exploitation is suspected. 7) Stay alert for vendor updates or patches and apply them promptly once available. 8) Consider deploying endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions to detect anomalous command execution behaviors. These targeted measures go beyond generic advice and address the specific nature of this vulnerability.

Description

An issue discovered in Alldata v0.4.6 allows attacker to run arbitrary commands via the processId parameter.

Impact

The potential impact of CVE-2024-29435 includes unauthorized execution of arbitrary commands on affected Alldata systems, which can lead to limited breaches of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Although the impact is rated low in each category, attackers could use this vulnerability as a foothold to escalate privileges or move laterally within a network. The requirement for user interaction reduces the likelihood of widespread automated exploitation but does not prevent targeted attacks, especially in environments where users may be tricked into triggering the vulnerability. Organizations relying on Alldata for critical operations could face operational disruptions or data exposure. The absence of patches means that organizations must rely on compensating controls, increasing the risk window. The vulnerability could be exploited in spear-phishing campaigns or other social engineering attacks to induce user interaction. Overall, the impact is moderate but should not be underestimated in sensitive or high-value environments.

CWE-77Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #23OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.
Architecture and Design
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Implementation
If possible, ensure that all external commands called from the program are statically created.
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
LDAP Injection (opens in a new tab)
Command Delimiters (opens in a new tab)
IMAP/SMTP Command Injection (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Writeable Terminal Devices (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

gist.github.com/Raybye/ea3a46adc5ea51e659c42218f05153fa (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Feb 2026, 11:34 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-77

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats