CVE-2023-22936
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 ‘search_listener’ parameter in a search allows for a blind server-side request forgery (SSRF) by an authenticated user. The initiator of the request cannot see the response without the presence of an additional vulnerability within the environment.
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 · high confidenceA blind server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in Splunk Enterprise's search functionality via the 'search_listener' parameter. An authenticated user can trigger the server to make requests to arbitrary internal or external resources, but cannot view the response directly due to the blind nature of the exploitation.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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.
-
Check Splunk Enterprise versionRun 'splunk version' from the Splunk bin directory or check $SPLUNK_HOME/etc/splunk.version for the full version stringAffected if Version is 8.1.0 through 8.1.12, 8.2.0 through 8.2.9, or 9.0.0 through 9.0.3
-
Check Splunk Cloud Platform versionNavigate to Settings > About > Version in the Splunk Cloud console or contact Splunk support for version informationAffected if Version is earlier than 9.0.2209.3
-
Identify use of search_listener parameterSearch saved searches, reports, and dashboard configurations for the string 'search_listener' using the built-in search: index=_internal sourcetype=splunkd_ui_access | search search_listenerAffected if Any saved objects contain the 'search_listener' parameter in their configuration
-
Review access logs for search_listener usageExamine splunkd_access.log (typically in $SPLUNK_HOME/var/log/splunk/) for HTTP requests containing 'search_listener' in the query string: search sourcetype=splunkd_access log_level=INFO | search uri=*search_listener*Affected if Any HTTP requests to /services/search/v2/ or similar endpoints include the search_listener parameter
-
Check for suspicious outbound network connectionsReview Splunk server network connections and DNS lookups for unexpected internal or external destinations, particularly to ports 80, 443, or atypical ports from Splunk processesAffected if Splunk is making outbound HTTP/HTTPS requests to internal infrastructure or unexpected external hosts that cannot be explained by normal Splunk functionality
The environment is affected if Splunk Enterprise version falls within 8.1.0-8.1.12, 8.2.0-8.2.9, or 9.0.0-9.0.3 (or Splunk Cloud is below 9.0.2209.3) AND the search_listener parameter is actively being used in the environment.
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 to remediate this vulnerability.
Splunk Enterprise: upgrade to 8.1.13, 8.2.10, or 9.0.4 (or later); Splunk Cloud Platform: upgrade to 9.0.2209.3 or later
- 1. Review Splunk upgrade documentation for your deployment topology (single instance or distributed).
- 2. Ensure you have a complete backup of your Splunk environment including configuration files and the underlying data store.
- 3. For Splunk Enterprise: Download the appropriate fixed version (8.1.13, 8.2.10, or 9.0.4) from splunk.com/download.
- 4. For Splunk Cloud: Contact Splunk Support to schedule the upgrade to version 9.0.2209.3 or later.
- 5. Test the upgrade in a non-production environment first to validate compatibility with your custom configurations and apps.
- 6. Schedule a maintenance window as upgrades may require brief service interruption.
- 7. Execute the upgrade following Splunk's official upgrade procedure.
- 8. After upgrade, verify the Splunk services are running correctly and perform a sanity check on search functionality.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-22936 — 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-2023-22936 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