CVE-2024-47886VulnerabilityPublished 2 Mar 2026

CVE-2024-47886: chamilo-lms · Deserialization of Untrusted Data

Affects chamilo-lmsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.7 High : upgrade to 1.11.28 soon.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.7High

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

EPSS: 0.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 60% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.11.28, 1.11.26

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: High
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 2 Mar 2026
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

Upgrade chamilo-lms to 1.11.28; chamilo/chamilo-lms to 1.11.26.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
chamilochamilo-lms	Affected >=1.11.12 <1.11.28	Fixed in 1.11.28
GitHubchamilo/chamilo-lms`pkg:github/chamilo/chamilo-lms`Other threats	Affected <1.11.26 >=1.11.12	Fixed in 1.11.26

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

AI-suggested

1. Immediately upgrade Chamilo LMS installations to version 1.11.28 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. 2. Restrict administrative access to the LMS to trusted personnel and enforce strong authentication mechanisms such as multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce risk of credential compromise. 3. Disable or remove the virtualization plugin vchamilo if it is not essential to your LMS deployment to reduce the attack surface. 4. Monitor LMS server logs for unusual activity related to phar file uploads or deserialization attempts. 5. Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules to detect and block suspicious serialized payloads targeting the LMS. 6. Conduct regular security audits and vulnerability scans on LMS infrastructure to identify and remediate similar deserialization or code execution risks. 7. Isolate the LMS server within a segmented network zone to limit potential lateral movement in case of compromise. 8. Educate administrators on phishing and credential security best practices to prevent unauthorized access.

Description

Chamilo is a learning management system. Chamillo is affected by a post-authentication phar unserialize which leads to a remote code execution (RCE) within versions 1.11.12 to 1.11.26. By abusing multiple supported features from the virtualization plugin vchamilo, the vulnerability allows an administrator to execute arbitrary code on the server. This issue has been patched in version 1.11.26.

Impact

Successful exploitation of CVE-2024-47886 allows an attacker with administrator access to execute arbitrary code on the server hosting Chamilo LMS. This can lead to full system compromise, including data theft, manipulation of educational content, disruption of LMS services, and potential lateral movement within the network. Given Chamilo's role in managing sensitive educational data and user information, this vulnerability threatens confidentiality, integrity, and availability of critical learning infrastructure. Organizations relying on Chamilo LMS for remote education or training could face operational downtime, reputational damage, and regulatory compliance issues if exploited. The vulnerability's exploitation does not require additional user interaction beyond admin authentication, increasing the risk if admin credentials are compromised or weak. Although no known exploits are currently in the wild, the high severity and ease of exploitation make timely patching essential to prevent future attacks.

CWE-502Deserialization of Untrusted Data (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #15OWASP Top 10 A08:2025: Software or Data Integrity Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product deserializes untrusted data without sufficiently ensuring that the resulting data will be valid.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
If available, use the signing/sealing features of the programming language to assure that deserialized data has not been tainted. For example, a hash-based message authentication code (HMAC) could be used to ensure that data has not been modified.
Implementation
When deserializing data, populate a new object rather than just deserializing. The result is that the data flows through safe input validation and that the functions are safe.
Implementation
Explicitly define a final object() to prevent deserialization.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
XML External Entity Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Software Supply Chain Security (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.2 (opens in a new tab)
V5.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
V5.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Object 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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 9 Mar 2026, 17:18 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-502

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats