CVE-2024-43363
RCE in Cacti ≤ 1.2.28
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-43363 is a high-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in Cacti Cacti. Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 2% 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.
Cacti, an open source performance and fault management framework, is affected by CVE-2024-43363, a code injection flaw tracked under CWE-94. An administrator can supply a device hostname containing embedded PHP and force the application to treat a PHP file as its log target by advancing only through step 5 of the installation routine, enabling subsequent log poisoning that results in remote code execution when the log URL is requested.
The attack requires an authenticated administrative account and network access; once the poisoned log is written, an attacker can execute arbitrary commands on the server with the privileges of the web server process. The CVSS 3.1 base score is 7.2, reflecting high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability under low attack complexity.
The vulnerability is resolved in Cacti 1.2.28, and the project states there are no known workarounds; administrators should upgrade promptly. Public references include the GitHub Security Advisory GHSA-gxq4-mv8h-6qj4 and the Debian LTS announcement for affected packages.
The current EPSS of 0.7513 matches its recorded peak, indicating moderate but stable exploitation interest since disclosure.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-40251
Vulnerability Data
Cacti is an open source performance and fault management framework. An admin user can create a device with a malicious hostname containing php code and repeat the installation process (completing only step 5 of the installation process is enough, no…
more
need to complete the steps before or after it) to use a php file as the cacti log file. After having the malicious hostname end up in the logs (log poisoning), one can simply go to the log file url to execute commands to achieve RCE. This issue has been addressed in version 1.2.28 and all users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation finds code paths that accept and execute externally influenced strings.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from being used to construct executable code without neutralization.
Least privilege limits the damage an injected code fragment can perform once executed.
Requiring documented secure development standards and tools enforces use of safe code-generation APIs and escaping.
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's SDLC practices directly target injection flaws via secure coding and testing (mostly), yet as a single broad outcome it leaves many code-generation specifics unaddressed (partial).
PR.DS-10 protects runtime data confidentiality/integrity but has no bearing on neutralizing externally influenced input during code generation, so neither direction shows any preventive effect.
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.
Banning unapproved code samples and unauthenticated web services, combined with secure-coding standards and SAST, prevents the dynamic generation or inclusion of attacker-supplied code.
Controls that restrict unauthorized or malicious code from being introduced via external networks or removable media limit opportunities for an attacker to inject and execute arbitrary code.