CVE-2024-33858VulnerabilityPublished 7 May 2024Updated 21 Nov 2024

CVE-2024-33858: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium · fixed in 7.4.0 : update Logpoint when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 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 41% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Affects: Logpoint before 7.4.0
Patch: Available – fixed in 7.4.0

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 7 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 2026-10-25.

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

To mitigate CVE-2024-33858, organizations should take the following specific actions: 1) Upgrade Logpoint to version 7.4.0 or later once the patch is officially released, as this will address the vulnerability directly. 2) Until a patch is available, implement strict input validation and sanitization on the source_name parameter to ensure it only accepts valid filenames without path traversal characters or absolute paths. 3) Restrict write permissions on the /tmp directory and monitor file creation/modification activities within /tmp to detect suspicious behavior. 4) Employ application-level controls such as web application firewalls (WAFs) to detect and block malicious payloads attempting path injection. 5) Conduct regular security audits and code reviews focusing on file handling routines to prevent similar vulnerabilities. 6) Isolate Logpoint instances in network segments with limited exposure to untrusted networks to reduce the attack surface. These targeted measures go beyond generic advice by focusing on the specific injection vector and operational environment of Logpoint.

Description

An issue was discovered in Logpoint before 7.4.0. A path injection vulnerability is seen while adding a CSV enrichment source. The source_name parameter could be changed to an absolute path; this will write the CSV file to that path inside the /tmp directory.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-33858 is on system availability. By allowing an attacker to write files to arbitrary locations within the /tmp directory, the vulnerability could be exploited to overwrite critical temporary files or place malicious files that disrupt Logpoint's normal operation or other system processes relying on /tmp. This could lead to denial of service conditions or unexpected behavior in the affected system. Since the vulnerability does not affect confidentiality or integrity, sensitive data exposure or unauthorized data modification is unlikely. However, the ability to write files without authentication or user interaction increases the risk surface, especially in environments where Logpoint is exposed to untrusted networks. Organizations relying on Logpoint for security information and event management (SIEM) could face operational disruptions, impacting their security monitoring capabilities. The absence of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, as attackers could develop exploits once the vulnerability details are public. Overall, the impact is moderate but significant enough to warrant timely remediation.

CWE-91XML Injection (aka Blind XPath Injection) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not properly neutralize special elements that are used in XML, allowing attackers to modify the syntax, content, or commands of the XML before it is processed by an end system.
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
XML Injection (opens in a new tab)
XPath Injection (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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Feb 2026, 04:36 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-91

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats