VulnerabilityPublished 30 Oct 2024Updated 31 Oct 2024

CVE-2024-48112: think · A Deserialization

Affects thinkSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.8 Critical.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.8Critical

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

EPSS: 0.8% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 58% 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:H/I:H/A:H

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

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: 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: 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 impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 30 Oct 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 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
GitHubtop-think/think`pkg:github/top-think/think`Other threats	Affected >=6.1.3 <=8.0.4	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-2024-48112, organizations should take the following specific actions: 1) Immediately identify and inventory all instances of ThinkPHP versions 6.1.3 through 8.0.4 in their environment. 2) Monitor official ThinkPHP channels for patches or security updates addressing this vulnerability and apply them as soon as they become available. 3) In the absence of patches, implement temporary mitigations such as disabling or restricting deserialization functionality in the \controller\Index.php component or related code paths. 4) Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) with updated rules to detect and block malicious serialized payloads targeting this vulnerability. 5) Conduct thorough code reviews to identify unsafe deserialization practices and refactor code to use safe serialization libraries or implement strict input validation and sanitization. 6) Restrict network access to vulnerable applications by limiting exposure to trusted IPs or internal networks where feasible. 7) Enable comprehensive logging and monitoring to detect suspicious activities indicative of exploitation attempts. 8) Educate development and security teams about the risks of unsafe deserialization and secure coding practices to prevent similar vulnerabilities. 9) Consider deploying runtime application self-protection (RASP) solutions to detect and prevent exploitation in real time. 10) Prepare incident response plans to quickly contain and remediate any successful attacks leveraging this vulnerability.

Description

A deserialization vulnerability in the component \controller\Index.php of Thinkphp v6.1.3 to v8.0.4 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code.

Impact

The impact of CVE-2024-48112 is severe and multifaceted. Successful exploitation allows unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on vulnerable servers, potentially leading to full system compromise. This jeopardizes the confidentiality of sensitive data, including user information and intellectual property, as attackers can access or exfiltrate data. Integrity is compromised as attackers can modify or delete data, inject malicious code, or alter application behavior. Availability is also at risk since attackers could disrupt services by deleting files, corrupting databases, or deploying ransomware. Organizations relying on ThinkPHP for web applications face risks of website defacement, data breaches, and lateral movement within their networks. The vulnerability's network-exploitable nature and lack of authentication requirements increase the likelihood of automated scanning and exploitation attempts. This could result in widespread attacks, especially targeting organizations that delay patching or mitigation. The potential for attackers to establish persistent backdoors or use compromised servers for launching further attacks amplifies the threat. Overall, the vulnerability poses a critical risk to organizations’ operational continuity, reputation, and regulatory compliance.

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 28 Feb 2026, 07:37 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-502

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats