CVE-2023-22935
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn Splunk Enterprise versions below 8.1.13, 8.2.10, and 9.0.4, the ‘display.page.search.patterns.sensitivity’ search parameter lets a search bypass SPL safeguards for risky commands. The vulnerability requires a higher privileged user to initiate a request within their browser and only affects instances with Splunk Web enabled.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceThe 'display.page.search.patterns.sensitivity' parameter in Splunk Enterprise allows bypassing SPL safeguards that normally restrict execution of risky commands. An attacker could trick a higher-privileged user into initiating a crafted request within their browser to execute searches that would normally be blocked by Splunk's built-in security controls.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 8.1.0, < 8.1.13>= 8.2.0, < 8.2.10>= 9.0.0, < 9.0.4< 9.0.2209.3CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Confirm Splunk Web is enabledCheck if Splunk Web is running. On the Splunk server, inspect the $SPLUNK_HOME/etc/system/default/web.conf or custom web.conf for the 'enableWebServer' setting, or run: splunk cmd -c 'serverinfo' | grep -i webAffected if Splunk Web is enabled and the version is within the affected ranges
-
Check installed Splunk Enterprise versionRun: splunk version or check the $SPLUNK_HOME/splunk-version file. Compare the version number against: 8.1.0 through 8.1.12, 8.2.0 through 8.2.9, or 9.0.0 through 9.0.3Affected if The installed version falls within any of the affected ranges (8.1.x where x < 13, 8.2.x where x < 10, 9.0.x where x < 4)
-
Inspect display.page.search.patterns.sensitivity settingIn Splunk Web, navigate to Settings > Server settings > General settings > Security, or query the configuration: curl -k https://localhost:8089/servicesNS/nobody/system/configs/conf-web/conf -u admin:password 2>/dev/null | grep -i patterns.sensitivity. Alternatively, check $SPLUNK_HOME/etc/system/local/inputs.conf for any [http] stanzas with this settingAffected if The display.page.search.patterns.sensitivity setting exists and is set to a value other than 'strict' or is absent (defaulting to a less restrictive value)
-
Verify web.conf for sensitivity configurationExamine $SPLUNK_HOME/etc/system/local/web.conf (or app-specific web.conf files) for any [display] stanza containing 'page.search.patterns.sensitivity' and note its valueAffected if The sensitivity parameter is configured to a permissive value or is not explicitly set to 'strict' while Splunk Web is running on an affected version
You are affected if Splunk Web is enabled and your Splunk version is 8.1.x < 13, 8.2.x < 10, or 9.0.x < 4 (or Cloud < 9.0.2209.3), and the display.page.search.patterns.sensitivity setting is not explicitly hardened to 'strict'.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped8.1.138.2.109.0.4
Upgrade Splunk Enterprise to version 8.1.13, 8.2.10, 9.0.4 or later. Alternatively, disable Splunk Web if not required, as this vulnerability only affects instances with Splunk Web enabled.
Minimum fixed versions: Splunk Enterprise 8.1.13, 8.2.10, or 9.0.4; Splunk Cloud Platform 9.0.2209.3
- 1. Identify the current Splunk Enterprise version installed (or the Splunk Cloud Platform version)
- 2. For Splunk Enterprise 8.1.x: Upgrade to version 8.1.13 or later
- 3. For Splunk Enterprise 8.2.x: Upgrade to version 8.2.10 or later
- 4. For Splunk Enterprise 9.0.x: Upgrade to version 9.0.4 or later
- 5. For Splunk Cloud Platform: Upgrade to version 9.0.2209.3 or later
- 6. After upgrading, verify the Splunk Web interface is functioning correctly and test that the 'display.page.search.patterns.sensitivity' parameter is properly restricted
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-22935 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-22935 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data