CVE-2024-1471: HTML Injection Vulnerability
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 19/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.40% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. Administrator privileges are required. A user must open a link or visit a page. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: Tenable Security Center 6.3.0.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to Tenable Security Center 6.3.0 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
An HTML injection vulnerability exists where an authenticated, remote attacker with administrator privileges on the Security Center application could modify Repository parameters, which could lead to HTML redirection attacks.
- Published
- Feb 14, 2024
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.4% · 34th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-20
Report tools
Action score
19
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 19 / 40 · 4.8 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.4%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 4.8
- CNA · tenable
- 5.9
- 1.1 point gap
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| tenable | security center | cpe:2.3:a:tenable:security_center |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- tenable security centerbefore 6.3.0
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (tenable). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
Tenable Security Center
- before 6.3.0affected · 6.3.0
Same product
tenable: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2026-19681An authenticated command injection vulnerability exists in Security Center related to file upload processing.40Plan
- CVE-2026-19626Remote Code Execution40Plan
- CVE-2026-19682A command injection vulnerability exists in Security Center where a remote, unauthenticated attacker could exploit this issue to execute arb38Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2018-1155Aug 2, 2018 · In SecurityCenter versions prior to 5.7.0, a cross-site scripting (XSS) issue could allow an authenticated attacker to inject JavaScript cod21Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2024-1367Feb 14, 2024 · Command Injection Vulnerability in Tenable Security Center28Monitor
- Later →CVE-2024-1891Jun 12, 2024 · Stored Cross Site Scripting21Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Tenable Security Center | 6.3.0 | Vendor (CNA) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
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.
No dated events beyond publication.
No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).
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
The product’s vendor appears in a public program. Matched by name; verify the scope text in the program.
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- Administrator privileges are required.
- A user must open a link or visit a page.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- low · data can be read
- Integrity
- low · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- none
Impact can extend beyond the vulnerable component (scope changes).
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- High
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality impact
- Low
- Integrity impact
- Low
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-20 · Improper Input ValidationCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
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)
- Buffer Overflow via Environment VariablesCAPEC-10likelihood: High · High
- Server Side Include (SSI) InjectionCAPEC-101likelihood: High · High
- Cross Zone ScriptingCAPEC-104likelihood: Medium · High
- Command Line Execution through SQL InjectionCAPEC-108likelihood: Low · Very High
- Object Relational Mapping InjectionCAPEC-109likelihood: Low · High
- SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter TamperingCAPEC-110likelihood: High · Very High
- Double EncodingCAPEC-120likelihood: Low · Medium
- Subverting Environment Variable ValuesCAPEC-13likelihood: High · Very High
ATT&CK techniques
- Obfuscated Files or InformationT1027
- Masquerading: Invalid Code SignatureT1036.001
- Steal Web Session CookieT1539
- Subvert Trust Controls: Code SigningT1553.002
- Impair Defenses:Impair Command History LoggingT1562.003
- Hijack Execution Flow:Dynamic Linker HijackingT1574.006
- Hijack Execution Flow:Path Interception by PATH Environment VariableT1574.007
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.