CVE-2024-36597
SQLi in Projectworlds Life Insurance Management System 1.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-36597 is a high-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Projectworlds Life Insurance Management System. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 18% 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.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
Aegon Life v1.0, a life insurance management system, contains a SQL injection vulnerability in the clientStatus.php file that is triggered through the client_id parameter. The flaw is tracked as CVE-2024-36597 and is classified under CWE-89, carrying a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.8 that reflects network-accessible exploitation with low attack complexity and low privileges required.
An authenticated attacker can supply crafted input to the client_id parameter and execute arbitrary SQL commands against the backend database. Successful exploitation grants the ability to read, modify, or delete sensitive records, potentially leading to full compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the application data.
Public proof-of-concept code and an Exploit-DB entry have been published, and the vulnerability maintains a high EPSS score near 0.87. No vendor advisory or patch information is referenced in available sources.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-36167
Vulnerability Data
Aegon Life v1.0 was discovered to contain a SQL injection vulnerability via the client_id parameter at clientStatus.php.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover SQLi flaws before deployment but does not stop their introduction.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from reaching SQL query construction without neutralization.
Secure engineering principles require parameterized queries and input sanitization that structurally eliminate SQLi.
System monitoring can identify attempted SQLi exploitation via anomalous queries after the weakness exists.
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 injection flaws during coding and review so largely prevent CWE-89 introduction, yet the single broad outcome leaves residual risk from incomplete neutralization techniques or missed edge cases.
Training raises developer awareness of SQLi risks and can reduce introduction likelihood (partial) but removes none of the actual coding flaw's risk by itself since technical neutralization is still required.
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.
The same secure-coding and static-analysis activities surface missing neutralization of SQL metacharacters before the system is accepted.
Early warnings and shared best-practice information help organizations apply the latest remediation techniques against SQL-injection vulnerabilities.
Threat-intelligence feeds that surface new SQL-injection campaigns enable rapid updates to query-construction defenses and detection signatures before exploitation occurs.
Secure-coding rules and security testing phases mandate the use of parameterized queries or equivalent escaping, preventing the construction of dynamic SQL statements from untrusted input.
Language-specific secure coding rules, peer review and SAST together prevent the construction of SQL statements from untrusted data without proper parameterization or escaping.