CVE-2024-10831
Path Traversal in Dbgpt Db-Gpt 0.6.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-10831 is a critical-severity Absolute Path Traversal (CWE-36) vulnerability in Dbgpt Db-Gpt. Its CVSS base score is 9.1 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Junk Data (T1001.001); ranked in the top 43% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as LLM Application Platforms; in the Supply Chain and Deployment risk domain.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and AC-3 (Access Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-7081
Vulnerability Data
In eosphoros-ai/db-gpt version 0.6.0, the endpoint for uploading files is vulnerable to absolute path traversal. This vulnerability allows an attacker to upload arbitrary files to arbitrary locations on the target server. The issue arises because the `file_key` and `doc_file.filename` parameters…
more
are user-controllable, enabling the construction of paths outside the intended directory. This can lead to overwriting essential system files, such as SSH keys, for further exploitation.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- LLM Application Platforms
- Risk Domain
- Supply Chain and Deployment
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: ai, gpt
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Input validation directly stops construction of absolute paths from untrusted data before they reach file operations.
Enforced access authorizations can limit which resources are reachable even if a traversal succeeds.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly require input validation and path sanitization that prevent absolute path traversal.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
A.8.25 mandates secure SDLC practices (secure requirements, checkpoints, secure coding guidelines, testing including code scans/penetration tests) that reach many path-traversal instances in custom software, but leaves a bounded remainder (e.g. third-party components, misconfigured outsourced development, or incomplete enforcement of guidelines) where the weakness can still be introduced and exploited.
Application security requirements typically mandate controls against path traversal in file-access functions.
A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles (least privilege, default-deny, distrust-external-input, hardening, design review against attack patterns) that reach a minority slice of absolute path traversal (e.g. explicit path canonicalization rules or sandboxing), but most instances arise from ordinary string-concatenation flaws in custom code that the clause's high-level engineering principles do not themselves stop from being written or exploited.
Secure coding standards directly require neutralization of absolute path sequences in pathname construction.
Security testing in development can detect absolute path traversal via static analysis and fuzzing.