Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:LCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-56199 is a medium-severity Cross-site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Phpmyfaq Phpmyfaq. Its CVSS base score is 5.2 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Browser Session Hijacking (T1185); ranked at the 34th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); 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.
CVE-2024-56199 is an HTML injection vulnerability in phpMyFAQ, an open source FAQ web application. It affects versions starting no later than 3.2.10 and prior to 4.0.2, specifically in the FAQ editor at the endpoint /admin/index.php?action=editentry. Attackers can inject malicious HTML content that manipulates the page structure with malformed elements like overlapping buttons, images, and iframes styled to cover the entire screen, resulting in complete disruption of the FAQ page's user interface.
Exploitation requires network access, low complexity, high privileges (PR:H), and user interaction (UI:R), as reflected in its CVSS score of 5.2 (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L). A privileged attacker, such as one with admin access to the editor, can render the page unusable for legitimate users, leading to denial of service, damage to user experience, and potential phishing or defacement attacks. The issue is linked to CWE-79 (Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation) and CWE-80 (Improper Neutralization of Script-Related HTML Tags in a Web Page).
The GitHub security advisory (GHSA-ww33-jppq-qfrp) documents the vulnerability, and phpMyFAQ version 4.0.2 includes a patch to mitigate it.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-0051
Vulnerability Data
phpMyFAQ is an open source FAQ web application. Starting no later than version 3.2.10 and prior to version 4.0.2, an attacker can inject malicious HTML content into the FAQ editor at `http[:]//localhost/admin/index[.]php?action=editentry`, resulting in a complete disruption of the FAQ…
more
page's user interface. By injecting malformed HTML elements styled to cover the entire screen, an attacker can render the page unusable. This injection manipulates the page structure by introducing overlapping buttons, images, and iframes, breaking the intended layout and functionality. Exploiting this issue can lead to Denial of Service for legitimate users, damage to the user experience, and potential abuse in phishing or defacement attacks. Version 4.0.2 contains a patch for the vulnerability.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.1.2V1.3.2V1.2.1V1.3.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect input neutralization through targeted web-application tests.
Input validation directly enforces neutralization of untrusted data before it reaches web output generation.
Output filtering can catch or sanitize unneutralized script content before it is served to users.
Secure engineering principles include mandatory output encoding and neutralization of HTML metacharacters to stop injection at the source.
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 target introduction of XSS via coding standards/testing (mostly), yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors unaddressed (partial).
Patching and EOL replacement can remediate known XSS instances in libraries or frameworks (partial) but do nothing to enforce input neutralization in application code (none).
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.
Secure-coding testing and automated code-analysis tools are applied to detect improper neutralization of script-related content during web-page generation.
Knowledge exchange on emerging attack techniques and patches reduces the likelihood that cross-site scripting flaws remain unaddressed in deployed applications.
Operational indicators of compromise for web-application attacks can be incorporated into WAF or input-filtering rules, lowering the likelihood that unsanitized data reaches the browser.
Requiring language-specific secure-coding standards and automated scanning during the SDLC catches missing output encoding or improper neutralization of untrusted data before the software reaches production.
Application security requirements explicitly call for neutralization of script-related HTML tags.
Secure-coding standards, SAST scans and removal of insecure code samples together eliminate the failure to neutralize script content that produces cross-site scripting flaws.