CVE-2023-2637
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 · uneditedRockwell Automation's FactoryTalk System Services uses a hard-coded cryptographic key to generate administrator cookies. Hard-coded cryptographic key may lead to privilege escalation. This vulnerability may allow a local, authenticated non-admin user to generate an invalid administrator cookie giving them administrative privileges to the FactoryTalk Policy Manger database. This may allow the threat actor to make malicious changes to the database that will be deployed when a legitimate FactoryTalk Policy Manager user deploys a security policy model. User interaction is required for this vulnerability to be successfully exploited.
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 confidenceFactoryTalk System Services contains a hard-coded cryptographic key used to generate administrator cookies. An authenticated local non-admin user can exploit this key to forge administrator cookies, gaining unauthorized administrative privileges in FactoryTalk Policy Manager and making malicious database changes that deploy when legitimate users trigger policy model deployment.
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= 6.11.0= 6.11.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/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.
-
Identify installed FactoryTalk Policy Manager versionCheck the installed version via Windows Registry at HKLM\SOFTWARE\Rockwell Software\FactoryTalk Policy Manager\Version or inspect the product executable file propertiesAffected if Version equals 6.11.0 exactly
-
Identify installed FactoryTalk System Services versionCheck the installed version via Windows Registry at HKLM\SOFTWARE\Rockwell Software\FactoryTalk System Services\Version or inspect the product executable file propertiesAffected if Version equals 6.11.0 exactly
-
Confirm if FactoryTalk services are runningOpen Windows Services console (services.msc) and check if 'FactoryTalk System Services' or related FactoryTalk services are in a Running stateAffected if The vulnerable version is installed and the service is active, enabling the attack surface
-
Check if local user authentication is enabledInspect FactoryTalk Policy Manager security configuration settings or Windows local user/group settings for FactoryTalk-related local accountsAffected if Local non-admin user accounts exist and are authenticated to the system, providing the attack vector for cookie forgery
If either FactoryTalk Policy Manager or FactoryTalk System Services version 6.11.0 is installed and local user authentication is enabled, the environment is affected by this hard-coded key vulnerability.
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.
From vendor dataReplace the hard-coded cryptographic key with a properly managed key, apply any vendor patches, and review user access controls. Consider compensating controls like limiting local access until the key can be rotated.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-2637 — 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-2023-2637 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