Vigilbase CVEConnect your agent

Laravel Pulse Allows Remote Code Execution via Unprotected Query Method

Not in CISA KEVPublic exploit codeCVE-2024-55661CWE-94

Not confirmed exploited. 1 of 8 rule sources name it.

Edge rules
1/8
Our test
No exploit yet
CVSS
8.7
EPSS
30.6% Top 2%
Posts, 14d
02026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 0 posts2026-11-03: 0 posts
Published
2024-12-13
Laravel Pulse is a real-time application performance monitoring tool and dashboard for Laravel applications. A vulnerability has been discovered in Laravel Pulse prior to version 1.3.1 that could allow remote code execution through the… More

Laravel Pulse is a real-time application performance monitoring tool and dashboard for Laravel applications. A vulnerability has been discovered in Laravel Pulse prior to version 1.3.1 that could allow remote code execution through the public `remember()` method in the `Laravel\Pulse\Livewire\Concerns\RemembersQueries` trait. This method is accessible via Livewire components and can be exploited to call arbitrary callables within the application. An authenticated user with access to Laravel Pulse dashboard can execute arbitrary code by calling any function or static method in which the callable is a function or static method and the callable has no parameters or no strict parameter types. The vulnerable to component is `remember(callable $query, string $key = '')` method in `Laravel\Pulse\Livewire\Concerns\RemembersQueries`, and the vulnerability affects all Pulse card components that use this trait. Version 1.3.1 contains a patch.

Ask Vigil

AI · answers from this page
Ask about CVE-2024-55661: who's covered, what to patch first, how vendors compare. I cite sources and won't help with attacks.

Workers AI (Llama 3.3). Can be wrong: check the cited source.

Severity, decoded

CVSS 4.0
High · 8.7 / 10

Exploitable over the network, with low privileges and no user interaction, leading to full loss of confidentiality, integrity and availability.

Over the internetAny user loginNo user actionWorks reliablyFull compromise
How the score is built11 metrics
  • Attack vectorAn attacker can reach it over the internet; no access to your network needed.
    Network
  • Attack complexityNo built-in defences have to be bypassed; the attack works reliably.
    Low
  • Attack requirementsThe attack works without any special deployment or timing conditions.
    None
  • Privileges requiredThe attacker needs an ordinary user account.
    Low
  • User interactionNo one has to click or open anything; the attack works on its own.
    None
  • Confidentiality impact (vulnerable system)An attacker can read all data the affected component holds, or the most sensitive parts of it.
    High
  • Integrity impact (vulnerable system)An attacker can change any data or files the affected component protects.
    High
  • Availability impact (vulnerable system)An attacker can take the component down completely or keep it from serving anyone.
    High
  • Confidentiality impact (other systems)Other systems' data is not exposed.
    None
  • Integrity impact (other systems)Other systems' data cannot be changed.
    None
  • Availability impact (other systems)Other systems keep working normally.
    None
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
CISA's assessmentSSVC, from the CVE record
ExploitationProof of concept

Public exploit code or a detailed write-up exists, but CISA has not seen attacks.

AutomatableNo

At least one step needs hands-on work, which slows mass attacks.

Technical impactTotal

A successful attack gives full control over the affected software or all of its data.

Public exploits

1 found
0 Metasploit1 Exploit-DB0 Scanner template0 GitHub PoCs

Links are to third-party code: never run it outside an isolated lab.

Timeline

  1. 2024-12-13
    CVE published
    CVE List
  2. 2025-06-09
    Exploit published on Exploit-DB
    Laravel Pulse 1.3.1 - Arbitrary Code Injection
  3. 2025-08-25
    Cloudflare ships a rule
    Laravel - Remote Code Execution - CVE:CVE-2024-55661

Social

2026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 0 posts2026-11-03: 0 posts

No posts seen yet on X, Bluesky, Mastodon, Hacker News or GitHub.

Vendor statements

Quoted
CloudflareWAF Managed Rules1 quoteRule off by default

First rule 2025-08-25, 255 days after the CVE was published.

2025-08-25New rule…02eaac5bDefault: DisabledSource
Laravel - Remote Code Execution - CVE:CVE-2024-55661. Previous action: Log. New action: Disabled. This is a New Detection
AWSAWS WAF Managed RulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. AWS often describes a vulnerability without naming its CVE (for example "Log4j"). We count only entries that name the CVE, so AWS coverage is understated.

Microsoft AzureFront Door and Application Gateway WAF (DRS)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The rule tables name CVEs but carry no dates, so Azure is left out of every time-to-rule figure.

Google CloudCloud Armor preconfigured WAF rulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Google names few CVEs: the release notes start in May 2024 and the rules reference lists CVEs without dates. Its cve-canary rules are opt-in.

FastlyNext-Gen WAF virtual patchesBefore feed history

The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.

F5Attack signatures (Distributed Cloud WAF)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Each signature lists the CVEs it references, with its id and date. F5 does not state a default action; signatures enforce once staging ends in your policy.

AkamaiApp & API Protector (Adaptive Security Engine)No public source

This vendor publishes no machine-readable rule changelog we can check.

OWASP CRSCore Rule Set (open source, used inside many WAFs)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. CRS rarely names CVEs: it relies on generic detections. Our own lab measures what it actually blocks.