Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
GNU Emacs versions before 30.1 can run attacker-controlled code when a user applies certain development features to an untrusted Emacs Lisp file. Exploitation requires user interaction, but successful execution can compromise the user's files, credentials, and workstation under that user's privileges.
Executive priority
Prioritize developer, operations, and administrator endpoints because their accounts may hold source code, credentials, or production access. Patch promptly, while applying temporary workflow restrictions where upgrades require testing. Broad emergency response is not supported without evidence of exposure or exploitation.
Technical view
Unsafe Lisp macro expansion in elisp-mode.el affects elisp-completion-at-point and on-the-fly diagnosis that byte-compiles untrusted Emacs Lisp. The issue is classified as CWE-94 and CVSS 3.1 7.8, requiring local access and user interaction while potentially affecting confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
Likely exposure
Exposure is most likely on developer or administrator workstations running GNU Emacs before 30.1 where users inspect untrusted Emacs Lisp and invoke code completion or relevant on-the-fly diagnostics. Systems not processing untrusted Lisp through these features have lower practical exposure.
Exploitation context
The supplied sources do not establish active exploitation, and the CVE is not listed as KEV. Exploitation requires persuading a user to process malicious Emacs Lisp with an affected feature; merely identifying the file as untrusted does not make these operations safe.
Researcher notes
The CVSS vector is AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. The vulnerable behavior crosses a trust boundary through macro expansion during editor assistance rather than ordinary intentional evaluation. Available evidence identifies GNU Emacs before 30.1; downstream distribution backport status must be verified separately.
Mitigation direction
- Upgrade GNU Emacs to 30.1 or a vendor package containing the security backport.
- Until updated, avoid code completion on untrusted Emacs Lisp source files.
- Disable on-the-fly diagnostics that byte-compile untrusted Emacs Lisp.
- Check operating-system vendor guidance for supported package versions and backports.
Validation and detection
- Inventory installed GNU Emacs versions and flag releases earlier than 30.1.
- Confirm vendor-packaged Emacs builds include the CVE-2024-53920 security backport.
- Review configurations for automatic diagnostics or byte compilation of Emacs Lisp.
- Identify users who recently processed externally sourced Emacs Lisp and review relevant endpoint telemetry.
Public sources used
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
CWE-94: Code execution behavior lookup
Code execution and unsafe deserialization weaknesses often justify reviewing execution behavior and process telemetry. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupExecution behavior lookup
The CVE wording references code or command execution, so execution technique review may help defensive triage. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupCVE-2024-53920 mapping review
Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.
Open ATT&CK lookup- Severity
- High
- CVSS
- 7.8 (3.1)
- Known Exploited
- No
- Published
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
SSVC decision data
CVSS vector scores
1 official scoreWe collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H1.85.9CISA-ADPVulnerability scoring details
Base CVSS 3.1 score
7.8HighVector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Vulnerability timeline
Timeline events are normalized from CVE metadata, CNA source timelines, ADP timelines, and KEV metadata when present.
- CVE reservedCVE Program
The CVE ID was reserved by the assigning CNA.
- CVE publishedCVE Program
The CVE record was published.
- CVE updatedCVE Program
The CVE record metadata indicates this as the latest update time.
ADP provider summaries
Source materials
- CVE List V5 sourceCVE List V5
- https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/tree/ChangeLog.4CVE reference, mitre
- https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/tag/?h=emacs-30.0.92CVE reference, mitre
- https://eshelyaron.com/posts/2024-11-27-emacs-aritrary-code-execution-and-how-to-avoid-it.htmlCVE reference, mitre
- https://yhetil.org/emacs/CAFXAjY5f4YfHAtZur1RAqH34UbYU56_t6t2Er0YEh1Sb7-W=hg@mail.gmail.com/CVE reference, mitre
- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42256409CVE reference, mitre
- https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/tree/etc/NEWS?h=emacs-30.1CVE reference, mitre
- https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2025/02/msg00033.htmlCVE reference, CVE
Products and packages named in the record
CWE details
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.
Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')
Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.