CVE-2024-55516VulnerabilityPublished 17 Dec 2024Updated 18 Dec 2024

CVE-2024-55516: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.1 Critical.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.1Critical

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 43% 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: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 17 Dec 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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-55516, organizations should immediately assess their network for the presence of affected Raisecom devices and restrict access to the web management interface to trusted internal networks only, using network segmentation and firewall rules. Disable or restrict the /upload_sysconfig.php endpoint if possible, or implement strict input validation and filtering at the network perimeter to block malicious payloads targeting this endpoint. Monitor device logs and network traffic for unusual file upload attempts or unauthorized access patterns. Employ intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) with updated signatures to detect exploitation attempts. Since no official patches are currently available, consider deploying virtual patching through web application firewalls (WAFs) or reverse proxies that can filter malicious requests. Engage with Raisecom support for updates on patches or firmware upgrades addressing this vulnerability and plan for timely application once released. Additionally, enforce strong authentication and access controls on management interfaces to reduce the attack surface. Regularly back up device configurations and maintain incident response plans to quickly recover from potential compromises.

Description

A vulnerability was found in Raisecom MSG1200, MSG2100E, MSG2200, and MSG2300 v3.90. The component affected by this issue is /upload_sysconfig.php on the web interface. By crafting a suitable form name, arbitrary files can be uploaded, potentially leading to unauthorized access to server permissions.

Impact

The impact of CVE-2024-55516 is significant for organizations relying on Raisecom MSG series devices, which are commonly used in telecommunications and enterprise network infrastructure. Successful exploitation can lead to unauthorized file uploads, potentially resulting in full compromise of the affected device. This can allow attackers to gain unauthorized access to sensitive configuration data, disrupt network operations, or use the compromised device as a foothold for lateral movement within the network. The confidentiality and integrity of network management systems are at high risk, which could lead to data breaches, service outages, or manipulation of network traffic. Given the critical role of these devices in network infrastructure, exploitation could have cascading effects on service availability and trustworthiness. Organizations worldwide that deploy these devices in their network environments face increased risk of targeted attacks, especially if devices are exposed to untrusted networks or the internet. The absence of known exploits currently provides a window for proactive defense, but the critical severity score indicates that exploitation could be devastating if it occurs.

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

gist.github.com/wscg928/cbe88078751abad2ada2334eb12a5060 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 27 Feb 2026, 23:52 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats