Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-32488

Foxit Pdf Editor ≤ 10.1.12.37872

Published
15 April 2024
Modified
09 July 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0016 5th percentile
Risk Priority 54 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-32488 is a high-severity Improper Handling of Insufficient Permissions or Privileges (CWE-280) vulnerability in Foxit Pdf Editor. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).

Operationally, ranked at the 5th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) and AC-25 (Reference Monitor) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

In Foxit PDF Reader and Editor before 2024.1, Local Privilege Escalation could occur during update checks because weak permissions on the update-service folder allow attackers to place crafted DLL files there.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-30329Same product: Foxit Pdf Editor
CVE-2023-51560Same product: Foxit Pdf Editor
CVE-2023-51557Same product: Foxit Pdf Editor
CVE-2024-30347Same product: Foxit Pdf Editor
CVE-2024-30350Same product: Foxit Pdf Editor
CVE-2023-51556Same product: Foxit Pdf Editor
CVE-2024-30349Same product: Foxit Pdf Editor
CVE-2024-30340Same product: Foxit Pdf Editor
CVE-2024-29072Same product: Foxit Pdf Editor
CVE-2024-12752Same product: Foxit Pdf Editor

Affected Assets

foxit
pdf editor
≤ 10.1.12.37872 · 11.0.0 — 11.2.8.53842 · 12.0.0 — 12.1.4.15400
foxit
pdf reader
≤ 2023.3.0.23028

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V6.2.2
  • V8.3.3

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Ensuring access decisions are applied to every request structurally prevents the product from taking unexpected paths when privileges are lacking.

A reference monitor that is always invoked guarantees privilege checks occur, eliminating the root condition for improper insufficient-privilege handling.

Access enforcement directly stops code from proceeding on insufficient privileges by applying authorization checks before resource access.

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.AA-05 mostly match
prevents

Defining, enforcing and reviewing access permissions with least privilege directly prevents code paths that mishandle insufficient privileges.

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring of software and data surfaces adverse events triggered by unhandled permission failures.

PR.PS-04 partial match
prevents

Generating logs of permission-related events enables detection and analysis of improper handling.

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

Security testing can detect missing or incorrect privilege handling.

prevents

Defines access-control policy that should prevent insufficient-privilege situations.

degrades

Specifies how access rights are granted, reviewed and revoked, directly addressing privilege handling.

degrades

Requires explicit management of privileged access rights, reducing the chance of missing privilege checks.

prevents

Secure-SDLC practices include privilege checks during design and coding.

prevents

Secure-coding standards require proper permission checks before resource access.

Hardening callouts derived

Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).

Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
  • V-248548 OL 8 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
  • V-248596 OL 8 must enable the SELinux targeted policy. prevents CWE-280
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
  • V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
RHEL 9 (2 rules)
  • V-258078 RHEL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
  • V-272496 RHEL 9 must elevate the SELinux context when an administrator calls the sudo command. prevents CWE-280

References