Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:N/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/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:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-54462 is a low-severity Relative Path Traversal (CWE-23) vulnerability in Flutter Image Picker Android. Its CVSS base score is 2.1 (Low).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 10th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
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.
CVE-2024-54462 is a vulnerability in the image_picker package, specifically the image_picker_android component used in Flutter applications. The issue stems from missing sanitization checks on file names constructed within image_picker, making them susceptible to manipulation by malicious document providers. This flaw, classified under CWE-22 (Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory) and CWE-23 (Relative Path Traversal), carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.1 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H), indicating high impact on integrity and availability.
An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by tricking a user into installing a malicious document provider on an Android device. Once installed, the user must interact with the vulnerable app by selecting an image file via the image_picker functionality from the attacker's provider. This allows the attacker to craft malicious file names that override internal files in the app's cache directory, potentially disrupting app functionality or enabling further compromise through cache poisoning.
The GitHub security advisory (GHSA-98v2-f47x-89xw) confirms the issue was patched in image_picker_android version 0.8.12+18. Developers are advised to update to the latest version of image_picker_android incorporating these fixes to mitigate the vulnerability.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-52573
Vulnerability Data
The file names constructed within image_picker are missing sanitization checks leaving them vulnerable to malicious document providers. This may result in cases where a user with a malicious document provider installed can select an image file from that provider while…
more
using your app and could potentially override internal files in your app cache. Issue patched in 0.8.12+18. It is recommended to update to the latest version of image_picker_android that contains the changes to address this vulnerability.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Enforces the intended directory access authorizations that path traversal would otherwise bypass.
Explicit validation of path inputs stops .. sequences from ever being interpreted by the file system.
Information-flow rules can be configured to reject traversals that would move data outside an approved directory boundary.
Least privilege reduces the set of reachable files even when a traversal succeeds.
Secure-engineering principles require safe pathname construction and input neutralization before any file operation.
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 path sanitization that prevent relative traversal.
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 path traversal via static/dynamic analysis, but does not itself implement the fix.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and path-handling controls that directly prevent relative path traversal.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against path traversal and other injection flaws.
Secure architecture principles include directory isolation and canonicalization, reducing but not eliminating traversal risk.
Secure coding standards require neutralizing path traversal sequences, directly addressing CWE-23.
Information access restriction limits which files can be reached, mitigating impact but not preventing the traversal flaw.