VulnerabilityPublished 6 May 2024Updated 6 Dec 2024

CVE-2024-33117: crmeb_java · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects crmeb_javaSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:42 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 40% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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: 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: 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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 6 May 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
Mavencom.zbkj/crmeb_java`pkg:maven/com.zbkj/crmeb_java`Other threats	Affected =1.3.4	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-2024-33117, organizations should first verify if they are running crmeb_java version 1.3.4 and assess exposure of the ImageMergeController's mergeList method. Employ network-level egress filtering to restrict outbound HTTP requests from the application server to only trusted destinations, effectively limiting SSRF exploitation scope. Deploy web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious request patterns targeting the vulnerable endpoint. Monitor logs for unusual outbound connections or spikes in request volume that may indicate exploitation attempts. Additionally, consider isolating the application server within a segmented network zone with minimal access to internal resources. Stay alert for vendor updates or patches addressing this vulnerability and apply them promptly once released. Conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focusing on SSRF vectors to identify and remediate similar weaknesses.

Description

crmeb_java v1.3.4 was discovered to contain a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the mergeList method in class com.zbkj.front.pub.ImageMergeController.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-33117 is on the availability of affected systems, as exploitation can cause denial of service by forcing the server to make arbitrary requests, potentially overwhelming internal or external resources. Although confidentiality and integrity are not directly impacted, SSRF vulnerabilities often serve as stepping stones for more complex attacks, such as accessing internal-only services, bypassing network segmentation, or exploiting other vulnerabilities within internal networks. Organizations running crmeb_java 1.3.4, particularly those exposing the vulnerable endpoint to the internet, risk service disruption and potential lateral movement by attackers. The medium CVSS score reflects the limited direct impact but acknowledges the ease of exploitation and the broad attack surface. Industries relying on crmeb_java for e-commerce or content management may experience operational disruptions, reputational damage, and increased incident response costs if exploited. The absence of known exploits suggests a window for proactive mitigation before widespread attacks occur.

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/cxcxcxcxcxcxcxc/cxcxcxcxcxcxcxc/blob/main/cxcxcxcxcxc/about-2024/33117.txt (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Feb 2026, 02:43 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats