CVE-2024-3150
Mintplexlabs Anythingllm ≤ 1.0.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-3150 is a high-severity Improper Handling of Exceptional Conditions (CWE-755) vulnerability in Mintplexlabs Anythingllm. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked in the top 47% 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.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SC-24 (Fail in Known State) and SI-17 (Fail-safe Procedures) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-31748
Vulnerability Data
In mintplex-labs/anything-llm, a vulnerability exists in the thread update process that allows users with Default or Manager roles to escalate their privileges to Administrator. The issue arises from improper input validation when handling HTTP POST requests to the endpoint `/workspace/:slug/thread/:threadSlug/update`.…
more
Specifically, the application fails to validate or check user input before passing it to the `workspace_thread` Prisma model for execution. This oversight allows attackers to craft a Prisma relation query operation that manipulates the `users` model to change a user's role to admin. Successful exploitation grants attackers the highest level of user privileges, enabling them to see and perform all actions within the system.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- LLM Application Platforms
- Risk Domain
- N/A
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: llm
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 1 hardening rule · 1 OS baseline
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Requires the system to fail to a known safe state on specified failures, limiting the impact of unhandled exceptional conditions.
Mandates explicit fail-safe procedures triggered by indicated failures, structurally preventing unhandled or mishandled exceptional conditions.
Requires generation of appropriate error messages on exceptional conditions, directly enforcing correct handling rather than silent or incorrect behavior.
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 explicitly require proper exception and error handling during design and coding.
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.
Security testing in development and acceptance verifies correct handling of exceptional conditions.
Documented operating procedures may specify exception handling but do not guarantee implementation.
Logging captures unhandled exceptions, aiding detection but not preventing the weakness.
Monitoring can surface unhandled exceptions but does not enforce proper handling.
Secure SDLC mandates exception-handling requirements and testing that directly prevent improper handling of exceptional conditions.
Application security requirements explicitly include handling of error and exceptional conditions.