Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-6892

XSS in Journyx 11.5.4

Published
08 August 2024
Modified
21 November 2024
CVSS Score v3.1 6.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0075 52th percentile
Risk Priority 54 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-6892 is a medium-severity Improper Neutralization of Script in an Error Message Web Page (CWE-81) vulnerability in Journyx Journyx. Its CVSS base score is 6.1 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Browser Session Hijacking (T1185); ranked in the top 48% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

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-2024-6892 is a reflected cross-site scripting vulnerability (CWE-79, CWE-81) in the Journyx web application. Attackers can supply a crafted URL that causes the application to echo attacker-controlled JavaScript back to a victim browser, executing it in the context of the Journyx origin. The flaw carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 6.1 with network attack vector, low complexity, no required privileges, and required user interaction.

An unauthenticated attacker can create a malicious link and deliver it to a Journyx user via email, chat, or another channel. When the recipient clicks the link, arbitrary JavaScript runs inside the Journyx session, enabling actions such as reading or modifying limited application data visible to that user. The reflected nature of the flaw means exploitation succeeds only on direct interaction with the supplied link.

Public advisories from KoreLogic and the Full Disclosure mailing list describe the issue and are available at the referenced URLs; they do not detail vendor patches or configuration work-arounds in the supplied references. The associated EPSS score has remained flat at 0.0751 with no observed rise after disclosure.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Attackers can craft a malicious link that once clicked will execute arbitrary JavaScript in the context of the Journyx web application.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1185 Browser Session Hijacking Collection
Adversaries may take advantage of security vulnerabilities and inherent functionality in browser software to change content, modify user-behaviors, and intercept information as part of various browser session hijacking techniques.
T1539 Steal Web Session Cookie Credential Access
An adversary may steal web application or service session cookies and use them to gain access to web applications or Internet services as an authenticated user without needing credentials.
T1659 Content Injection Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access and continuously communicate with victims by injecting malicious content into systems through online network traffic.
T1189 Drive-by Compromise Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access to a system through a user visiting a website over the normal course of browsing.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-25837Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-22438Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-27614Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-47164Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-49145Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-47853Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-28474Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-37636Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-1006Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-5005Shared CWE-79

Affected Assets

journyx
journyx
11.5.4

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.1.2
  • V1.3.2
  • V1.2.1

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 neutralize script syntax before it is emitted in error responses.

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require output encoding and neutralization to prevent script injection in error pages.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

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.

finds

Security testing in development and acceptance can detect unneutralized script in error pages but does not itself implement the fix.

prevents

Knowledge exchange on emerging attack techniques and patches reduces the likelihood that cross-site scripting flaws remain unaddressed in deployed applications.

prevents

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.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent unneutralized script in error pages.

prevents

Application security requirements explicitly call for proper handling of untrusted input to avoid script injection in error responses.

prevents

Secure system architecture principles reduce the likelihood of unsafe error handling but do not prescribe specific neutralization techniques.

References