Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2024-57428 is a critical-severity Cross-site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Phpjabbers Cinema Booking System. Its CVSS base score is 9.3 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Browser Session Hijacking (T1185); ranked in the top 49% 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 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-2024-57428 is a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in PHPJabbers Cinema Booking System version 2.0. The flaw stems from unsanitized input in file upload fields (event_img, seat_maps) and seat number configurations (number[new_X] in pjActionCreate), enabling attackers to inject persistent JavaScript code. It is associated with CWE-79 and carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N).
Any unauthenticated attacker with network access can exploit this vulnerability by submitting malicious payloads through the affected input fields, though it requires user interaction for execution. Successful exploitation allows persistent JavaScript injection, which can lead to phishing attacks, malware delivery, and session hijacking against other users viewing the tainted content.
Advisories and further details are available in the GitHub repository at https://github.com/ahrixia/CVE-2024-57428, while the product page is at https://www.phpjabbers.com/cinema-booking-system/.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-53583
Vulnerability Data
A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in PHPJabbers Cinema Booking System v2.0 exists due to unsanitized input in file upload fields (event_img, seat_maps) and seat number configurations (number[new_X] in pjActionCreate). Attackers can inject persistent JavaScript, leading to phishing, malware injection,…
more
and session hijacking.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.1.2V1.3.2
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.
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.
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.
Webpage malware scanning and block-listing of known malicious sites reduce the likelihood that reflected or stored script payloads reach a user’s browser.