CVE-2024-45846
RCE in Mindsdb 23.10.3.0 – 24.7.4.1
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-45846 is a high-severity Eval Injection (CWE-95) vulnerability in Mindsdb Mindsdb. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique JavaScript (T1059.007); ranked in the top 20% 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 Other AI Platforms; in the Other ATLAS/OWASP Terms risk domain.
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-2024-0105
Vulnerability Data
An arbitrary code execution vulnerability exists in versions 23.10.3.0 up to 24.7.4.1 of the MindsDB platform, when the Weaviate integration is installed on the server. If a specially crafted ‘SELECT WHERE’ clause containing Python code is run against a database…
more
created with the Weaviate engine, the code will be passed to an eval function and executed on the server.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- Other AI Platforms
- Risk Domain
- Other ATLAS/OWASP Terms
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- MindsDB is an AI/ML platform (AutoML for developers) that integrates with vector databases like Weaviate, ChromaDB, and others for AI applications such as embeddings and similarity search, fitting the 'Other Platforms' category as an enterprise AI platform.
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.1V1.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and code analysis can discover eval-injection flaws but does not stop their introduction.
Input validation explicitly requires neutralizing untrusted data before it reaches dynamic evaluation constructs such as eval.
Least privilege limits the damage an injected code fragment can perform once executed.
Secure-development standards and tools can mandate safe coding patterns that avoid unsafe dynamic evaluation.
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 require input neutralization and avoidance of unsafe dynamic evaluation.
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.
Security testing in development can detect eval injection vulnerabilities before deployment.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and safe coding practices that directly prevent eval injection.
Application security requirements include rules against dynamic code execution of untrusted input.
Secure architecture principles discourage unsafe dynamic evaluation constructs.
Secure coding explicitly requires neutralization of input before dynamic evaluation, directly mitigating eval injection.
Separation of environments limits the blast radius if eval injection occurs in non-production.