CVE-2024-48510VulnerabilityPublished 13 Nov 2024Updated 21 Nov 2024

CVE-2024-48510: dotnetzip · n/a

Affects dotnetzipSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.1 Critical · end of life, no fix coming : replace or isolate dotnetzip; no fix will be released.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.1Critical

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

EPSS: 2.0% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 80% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: None coming – the product is end of life

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

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

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: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 13 Nov 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

No fix will be released: dotnetzip is end of life. Replace it, or isolate it from untrusted networks until you can.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
NuGetdotnetzip`pkg:nuget/dotnetzip`Other threats	Affected <=1.16.0	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 official patches due to discontinued support, organizations should prioritize the following mitigations: 1) Audit all software dependencies to identify usage of DotNetZip and assess exposure. 2) Replace DotNetZip with actively maintained and secure ZIP processing libraries that properly handle path sanitization. 3) Implement strict input validation and sanitization on all ZIP file inputs, rejecting archives containing suspicious or absolute paths and directory traversal sequences. 4) Employ sandboxing or containerization for applications handling ZIP extraction to limit the impact of potential exploitation. 5) Restrict file system permissions for extraction directories to prevent overwriting critical system files. 6) Monitor logs and network traffic for anomalous ZIP file processing activities. 7) Educate developers and system administrators about the risks of using unsupported libraries and the importance of timely updates. 8) Consider network-level controls to block or inspect ZIP files from untrusted sources. These measures collectively reduce the risk until a secure replacement or patch is implemented.

Description

Directory Traversal vulnerability in DotNetZip v.1.16.0 and before allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the src/Zip.Shared/ZipEntry.Extract.cs component NOTE: This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.

Impact

The impact of CVE-2024-48510 is significant for organizations using legacy software that depends on DotNetZip for ZIP file processing. Successful exploitation can lead to arbitrary code execution, allowing attackers to gain control over affected systems, escalate privileges, or deploy malware. This can compromise the confidentiality and integrity of sensitive data and potentially lead to lateral movement within networks. Since no patches are available, organizations face increased risk, especially if they process untrusted ZIP files or receive ZIP files from external sources. The vulnerability can be leveraged to bypass security controls by placing malicious files in critical directories. The lack of user interaction and authentication requirements lowers the barrier for exploitation, increasing the threat surface. Industries relying on legacy .NET applications, such as finance, healthcare, government, and manufacturing, may experience severe operational disruptions and data breaches if exploited.

CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
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.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (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 27 Feb 2026, 21:31 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats