KiTTY versions 0.76.1.13 and before is vulnerable to command injection via the filename variable, occurs due to insufficient input sanitizat
KiTTY versions 0.76.1.13 and before is vulnerable to command injection via the filename variable, occurs due to insufficient input sanitization and validation, failure to escape special characters, and insecure system calls (at lines 2369-2390). This allows an attacker to add inputs inside the filename variable, leading to arbitrary code execution.
- Published
- Feb 9, 2024
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 4.7% · 91th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-77
Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.
Report tools
Action score
32
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 31 / 40 · 7.8 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 1 / 30 · 4.7%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- proof of concept
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
Noroxi analysis
No Noroxi analysis for this record yet
We don't hand-write analysis for the hundreds of thousands of vulnerabilities in the database; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| 9bis | kitty | cpe:2.3:a:9bis:kitty |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- 9bis kittyup to 0.76.1.13 inclusive
Same product
9bis: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2016-2563Stack-based buffer overflow in the SCP command-line utility in PuTTY before 0.67 and KiTTY 0.66.6.3 and earlier allows remote servers to cau49Plan
- CVE-2024-25004KiTTY versions 0.76.1.13 and before is vulnerable to a stack-based buffer overflow via the username, occurs due to insufficient bounds check32Monitor
- CVE-2024-25003KiTTY versions 0.76.1.13 and before is vulnerable to a stack-based buffer overflow via the hostname, occurs due to insufficient bounds check32Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
Proof of concept available
A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.
Evidence
- Exploit-DB entry ×1
Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.
| Source | Kind | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Exploit-DB entry | local | 2024-03-14 |
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
- Published
- First PoC+34 d
- TodaySep 30, 2026+965 d
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Someone with local access to the system can trigger it.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Local
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-77 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- LDAP InjectionCAPEC-136likelihood: High · High
- Command DelimitersCAPEC-15likelihood: High · High
- IMAP/SMTP Command InjectionCAPEC-183Medium
- Command InjectionCAPEC-248likelihood: Medium · High
- Manipulating Writeable Terminal DevicesCAPEC-40likelihood: High · Very High
- Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation LayersCAPEC-43likelihood: Medium · High
- Manipulating Writeable Configuration FilesCAPEC-75likelihood: High · Very High
- Manipulating Web Input to File System CallsCAPEC-76likelihood: High · Very High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.