CVE-2023-28158
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 · uneditedPrivilege escalation via stored XSS using the file upload service to upload malicious content. The issue can be exploited only by authenticated users which can create directory name to inject some XSS content and gain some privileges such admin user.
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 confidenceA stored XSS vulnerability in the file upload service allows authenticated users to inject malicious JavaScript via directory names. When administrators view the uploaded content, the XSS payload executes, potentially allowing the attacker to escalate privileges to admin level.
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>= 2.0, < 2.2.10CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
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 Apache Archiva installation and versionLocate the Archiva installation directory and check the version. Common locations include /opt/archiva or check for archiva.jar, or run: find / -name 'archiva*' -type f 2>/dev/null. Check version in a file typically named version.properties or in the WAR file metadataAffected if Apache Archiva version is 2.0 or higher but lower than 2.2.10
-
Confirm file upload service is accessibleCheck if the file upload functionality is enabled. Review Archiva configuration files (typically archiva.xml or security.xml in the conf directory) for upload-related settings. Verify that non-admin users have repository upload permissionsAffected if Authenticated non-admin users can upload files to repositories
-
Inspect repositories for suspicious directory namesNavigate to Archiva storage directories (typically under data/repositories or similar path in the installation). List directory names and examine for characters that may indicate XSS payloads such as <script>, javascript:, onerror=, or other HTML/script tagsAffected if Any directory name contains HTML script tags or JavaScript event handlers like <script or onerror=
-
Review administrator access logs for XSS execution attemptsCheck Archiva logs (typically in logs/archiva.log or similar) for entries containing XSS indicators in request parameters related to file/directory operations. Search for patterns like <script, %3Cscript, javascript:, or other encoded XSS vectors in upload-related requestsAffected if Logs contain requests with XSS payloads in directory or file name parameters
A user is affected if they have Apache Archiva version 2.0 through 2.2.9 installed with the file upload feature enabled for authenticated users, as this allows stored XSS execution when administrators view uploaded content.
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 · scoped2.2.10
Implement strict input validation and output encoding on directory names and file metadata. Consider adding Content Security Policy headers and CSRF tokens to prevent privilege escalation via XSS.
2.2.10 (or latest 2.2.x stable release)
- 1. Backup your current Apache Archiva installation including the 'archiva' directory and database/config files.
- 2. Stop the running Archiva service.
- 3. Download Apache Archiva version 2.2.10 (or the latest 2.2.x release) from the official Apache repository: https://archiva.apache.org/download.html
- 4. Replace the existing Archiva installation files with the new version, preserving your configuration and data directories.
- 5. Start the Archiva service.
- 6. Verify the installation by logging in and checking that the file upload service accepts directory names without executing malicious scripts.
- 7. Test that authenticated users with directory creation privileges cannot inject XSS content through directory names.
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-2023-28158 — 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-2023-28158 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