Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-7399 is a high-severity Path Traversal (CWE-22) vulnerability in Samsung Magicinfo 9 Server. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 0.2% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities 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-2024-7399 is a path traversal vulnerability, also described under CWE-434, that stems from improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory. It affects Samsung MagicINFO 9 Server versions prior to 21.1050 and permits an attacker to write arbitrary files with system-level authority. The flaw carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 8.8, reflecting network attack vector, low attack complexity, and low privileges required.
An authenticated attacker with low privileges can send specially crafted requests over the network to upload or write files outside intended directories. Successful exploitation grants the ability to modify system files, potentially leading to full control over confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the affected server.
Samsung has published security updates addressing the issue at its security portal. The vulnerability appears in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and Arctic Wolf has reported observed exploitation attempts in the wild. The associated EPSS score reached a peak of 0.8440 before receding to its current value of 0.7289.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-48330
Vulnerability Data
Improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory vulnerability in Samsung MagicINFO 9 Server version before 21.1050 allows attackers to write arbitrary file as system authority.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 24 April 2026
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.3.2V5.1.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Enforces the intended directory access authorizations that path traversal would otherwise bypass.
Input validation directly neutralizes special path elements before pathname construction occurs.
Malicious-code protection at entry points blocks dangerous file types from being accepted and executed.
Least privilege reduces the impact of any unauthorized file access obtained via traversal.
Least functionality restricts the file types and automatic processing capabilities the system will accept.
Mobile-code controls define, authorize, and block unacceptable uploaded code before automatic processing occurs.
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.
Restricting execution of unauthorized software directly blocks dangerous uploaded files from running.
Hardened configuration baselines can enforce allowed file types and processing rules.
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.
Secure development practices include input validation and file-type restrictions that prevent this weakness.
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.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and path sanitization that directly prevent path traversal.
Application security requirements include rules for safe file handling and canonicalization.
Secure architecture principles require least-privilege file access and directory isolation.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe path construction and mandate safe APIs.
Information access restriction limits which files an application may read or write.