Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-46986 is a critical-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Tuzitio Camaleon Cms. Its CVSS base score is 9.9 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); 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 AC-3 (Access Enforcement) 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.
Camaleon CMS, a Ruby on Rails-based content management system, contains an arbitrary file write vulnerability in the upload method of MediaController. The flaw stems from insufficient path validation (CWE-22 and CWE-74) that permits an authenticated user to supply crafted file paths during media uploads, resulting in writes to arbitrary locations on the underlying filesystem subject to the web server process permissions.
An attacker with a low-privileged authenticated account can therefore place attacker-controlled Ruby files into sensitive directories such as config/initializers/. Because Rails automatically executes code in that folder on startup, the write can be leveraged for delayed remote code execution, giving the attacker full control over the application and potentially the host.
The vulnerability is fixed in Camaleon CMS release 2.8.2; the project advisory states there are no known workarounds and explicitly recommends immediate upgrade. The associated EPSS score stands at 0.9229.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-2890
Vulnerability Data
Camaleon CMS is a dynamic and advanced content management system based on Ruby on Rails. An arbitrary file write vulnerability accessible via the upload method of the MediaController allows authenticated users to write arbitrary files to any location on the…
more
web server Camaleon CMS is running on (depending on the permissions of the underlying filesystem). E.g. This can lead to a delayed remote code execution in case an attacker is able to write a Ruby file into the config/initializers/ subfolder of the Ruby on Rails application. This issue has been addressed in release version 2.8.2. 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
—
—
—
V5.3.2V1.2.1V1.2.3V1.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Enforces the intended directory access authorizations that path traversal would otherwise bypass.
SI-10 directly requires validation of information inputs to reject malformed or special-element content before it reaches downstream parsers.
Least privilege reduces the impact of any unauthorized file access obtained via traversal.
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 validation and output encoding that prevent injection flaws.
Patching/maintenance can remediate known path-traversal flaws in deployed software (partial prevention of exploitability) but does nothing to stop the coding defect from being introduced in the first place.
PR.AA-05 defines and reviews access policies but does not address code-level pathname neutralization, so neither direction prevents CWE-22.
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 catches injection vulnerabilities before release.
Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent injection flaws.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection attacks in software design.
Secure architecture principles reduce injection surfaces but do not prescribe specific neutralization techniques.