CVE-2024-6655VulnerabilityPublished 16 Jul 2024Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-6655: Code Injection

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.0 High.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.0High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 40% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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 16 Jul 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-2024-6655, organizations should implement the following specific measures: 1) Monitor and restrict the directories from which GTK applications are launched, ensuring they do not include untrusted or user-writable locations such as shared or temporary directories. 2) Educate users to avoid launching GTK applications from untrusted directories or locations where malicious libraries could be placed. 3) Employ application whitelisting and integrity verification to detect and prevent loading of unauthorized libraries. 4) Use Linux security modules such as SELinux or AppArmor to restrict GTK applications' ability to load libraries from arbitrary paths. 5) Regularly update GTK libraries and monitor vendor advisories for patches addressing this vulnerability; apply patches promptly once available. 6) In development and deployment environments, enforce strict build and execution policies to prevent inadvertent exposure to malicious libraries. 7) Consider containerization or sandboxing GTK applications to limit the impact of potential code injection. These targeted mitigations go beyond generic advice by focusing on controlling the execution context and library loading behavior specific to this vulnerability.

Description

A flaw was found in the GTK library. Under certain conditions, it is possible for a library to be injected into a GTK application from the current working directory.

Impact

The impact of CVE-2024-6655 is significant for organizations using GTK-based applications, especially on Linux desktops, embedded systems, and devices relying on GTK for their graphical interface. An attacker with local access who can trick a user into launching a GTK application from a directory containing a malicious library can execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the user running the application. This can lead to data theft, unauthorized system modifications, installation of persistent malware, or denial of service. Since many Linux distributions and embedded devices use GTK, the scope is broad. The requirement for local access and user interaction limits remote exploitation but does not eliminate risk in environments where users may be tricked into opening applications from untrusted directories, such as shared workstations, developer environments, or via social engineering. The high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability means that sensitive data and system stability can be severely affected. Organizations relying on GTK applications for critical operations may face operational disruptions and data breaches if exploited.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…