CVE-2024-53866
Pnpm ≤ 9.15.0
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2024-53866 is a medium-severity Untrusted Search Path (CWE-426) vulnerability in Pnpm Pnpm. Its CVSS base score is 5.8 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Path Interception (T1034); ranked in the top 42% 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 CM-6 (Configuration Settings) and CM-7 (Least Functionality) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-3510
Vulnerability Data
The package manager pnpm prior to version 9.15.0 seems to mishandle overrides and global cache: Overrides from one workspace leak into npm metadata saved in global cache; npm metadata from global cache affects other workspaces; and installs by default don't…
more
revalidate the data (including on first lockfile generation). This can make workspace A (even running with `ignore-scripts=true`) posion global cache and execute scripts in workspace B. Users generally expect `ignore-scripts` to be sufficient to prevent immediate code execution on install (e.g. when the tree is just repacked/bundled without executing it). Here, that expectation is broken. Global state integrity is lost via operations that one would expect to be secure, enabling subsequently running arbitrary code execution on installs. Version 9.15.0 fixes the issue. As a work-around, use separate cache and store dirs in each workspace.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Secure baseline settings can enforce absolute, organization-controlled paths for critical resources.
Least-functionality configuration can prohibit unapproved directories or executables from being reachable via search paths.
Engineering principles such as trusted paths, complete mediation, and least privilege directly require hard-coded or validated search paths instead of external ones.
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.
Preventing execution of unauthorized code directly blocks the malicious binaries that an untrusted search path would load.
Secure development practices include avoiding or sanitizing externally influenced search paths in application code.
Hardened configuration baselines can enforce safe search paths and restrict environment variables that enable the weakness.
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 can discover search-path issues but does not itself prevent them in production code.
Restricting software installation reduces the chance that untrusted binaries or libraries are placed in search paths.
Secure architecture principles include hard-coded or validated search paths and avoiding reliance on untrusted directories.
Secure coding standards require absolute paths or integrity-checked search paths, directly mitigating CWE-426.
Change-management processes can enforce review of path-handling changes, indirectly lowering risk.