Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-29029

SSRF in Usememos Memos ≤ 0.22.0

Public PoCSSRFXSS
Published
19 April 2024
Modified
02 January 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 6.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
EPSS Score 0.011 62th percentile
Risk Priority 52 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-29029 is a medium-severity Cross-site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Usememos Memos. Its CVSS base score is 6.1 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Browser Session Hijacking (T1185); ranked in the top 38% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) and SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

memos is a privacy-first, lightweight note-taking service. In memos 0.13.2, an SSRF vulnerability exists at the /o/get/image that allows unauthenticated users to enumerate the internal network and retrieve images. The response from the image request is then copied into the…

more

response of the current server request, causing a reflected XSS vulnerability. Version 0.22.0 of memos removes the vulnerable file.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1185 Browser Session Hijacking Collection
Adversaries may take advantage of security vulnerabilities and inherent functionality in browser software to change content, modify user-behaviors, and intercept information as part of various browser session hijacking techniques.
T1539 Steal Web Session Cookie Credential Access
An adversary may steal web application or service session cookies and use them to gain access to web applications or Internet services as an authenticated user without needing credentials.
T1659 Content Injection Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access and continuously communicate with victims by injecting malicious content into systems through online network traffic.
T1189 Drive-by Compromise Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access to a system through a user visiting a website over the normal course of browsing.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-0111Same product: Usememos Memos
CVE-2023-0107Same product: Usememos Memos
CVE-2023-0112Same product: Usememos Memos
CVE-2023-0110Same product: Usememos Memos
CVE-2023-0106Same product: Usememos Memos
CVE-2023-0108Same product: Usememos Memos
CVE-2024-29028Same product: Usememos Memos
CVE-2025-22952Same product: Usememos Memos
CVE-2024-29030Same product: Usememos Memos
CVE-2023-49785Shared CWE-79, CWE-918

Affected Assets

usememos
memos
≤ 0.22.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.1.2
  • V1.3.2
  • V1.3.6
  • V1.5.3

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Information flow enforcement can restrict which destinations the server is allowed to contact on behalf of users.

Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect input neutralization through targeted web-application tests.

Input validation directly enforces neutralization of untrusted data before it reaches web output generation.

Output filtering can catch or sanitize unneutralized script content before it is served to users.

Boundary protection limits the network reach of server-initiated requests even if SSRF occurs.

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly target introduction of XSS via coding standards/testing (mostly), yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors unaddressed (partial).

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring of web applications and services can detect anomalous outbound requests indicative of SSRF.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability identification processes can discover and record SSRF flaws in web applications.

PR.IR-01 partial match
prevents

Network segmentation and egress controls can limit the damage from successful SSRF requests.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Patching and EOL replacement can remediate known XSS instances in libraries or frameworks (partial) but do nothing to enforce input neutralization in application code (none).

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.

finds

Secure-coding testing and automated code-analysis tools are applied to detect improper neutralization of script-related content during web-page generation.

prevents

Knowledge exchange on emerging attack techniques and patches reduces the likelihood that cross-site scripting flaws remain unaddressed in deployed applications.

prevents

Operational indicators of compromise for web-application attacks can be incorporated into WAF or input-filtering rules, lowering the likelihood that unsanitized data reaches the browser.

prevents

Requiring language-specific secure-coding standards and automated scanning during the SDLC catches missing output encoding or improper neutralization of untrusted data before the software reaches production.

prevents

Secure-coding standards, SAST scans and removal of insecure code samples together eliminate the failure to neutralize script content that produces cross-site scripting flaws.

none

Webpage malware scanning and block-listing of known malicious sites reduce the likelihood that reflected or stored script payloads reach a user’s browser.

References