Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2024-31204 is a medium-severity Cross-site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Mailcow Mailcow\. 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 6% 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-29108
Vulnerability Data
mailcow: dockerized is an open source groupware/email suite based on docker. A security vulnerability has been identified in mailcow affecting versions prior to 2024-04. This vulnerability resides in the exception handling mechanism, specifically when not operating in DEV_MODE. The system…
more
saves exception details into a session array without proper sanitization or encoding. These details are later rendered into HTML and executed in a JavaScript block within the user's browser, without adequate escaping of HTML entities. This flaw allows for Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) attacks, where attackers can inject malicious scripts into the admin panel by triggering exceptions with controlled input. The exploitation method involves using any function that might throw an exception with user-controllable argument. This issue can lead to session hijacking and unauthorized administrative actions, posing a significant security risk. Version 2024-04 contains a fix for the issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.1.2V1.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
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.
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 target introduction of XSS via coding standards/testing (mostly), yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors unaddressed (partial).
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.
Secure-coding testing and automated code-analysis tools are applied to detect improper neutralization of script-related content during web-page generation.
Knowledge exchange on emerging attack techniques and patches reduces the likelihood that cross-site scripting flaws remain unaddressed in deployed applications.
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.
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.
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.
Webpage malware scanning and block-listing of known malicious sites reduce the likelihood that reflected or stored script payloads reach a user’s browser.