CVE-2023-28475
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 · uneditedConcrete CMS (previously concrete5) versions 8.5.12 and below, and versions 9.0 through 9.1.3 is vulnerable to Reflected XSS on the Reply form because msgID was not sanitized.
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 confidenceReflected XSS vulnerability in Concrete CMS versions 8.5.12 and below, and 9.0-9.1.3. The msgID parameter in the Reply form is not properly sanitized before being reflected in the response, allowing injection of malicious scripts.
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< 9.2.0CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 Concrete CMS installationLocate the Concrete CMS installation directory. The version is typically defined in a version.php file at /concrete/config/version.php or in the root directory.Affected if Concrete CMS is installed on the system
-
Determine installed versionOpen the version.php file and read the CMS version number defined in the version constantsAffected if Installed version is below 9.2.0 (this includes all 8.x versions up to 8.5.12 and 9.0.x through 9.1.3)
-
Check if Reply form is accessibleVerify the messaging/reply form functionality is enabled. This can be done by checking if the file handling the reply form exists at /concrete/controllers/single_page/tools/required/messages.php or by attempting to access the messaging feature in the dashboard.Affected if The Reply form feature is enabled and accessible to users
Environment is affected if Concrete CMS version is below 9.2.0 AND the messaging Reply form feature is accessible, allowing the msgID parameter to be reflected without sanitization.
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 · scoped9.2.0
Update to a patched version of Concrete CMS that sanitizes the msgID parameter, or implement output encoding/validation on the msgID parameter in the Reply form handler.
Concrete CMS 9.2.0
- Backup your current Concrete CMS installation and database before upgrading
- Download Concrete CMS version 9.2.0 from the official concretecms.com website
- Follow the standard Concrete CMS upgrade process: upload the new files, then navigate to /index.php/tools/required/upgrade or run the database upgrade script
- Verify that the msgID parameter on the Reply form is now properly sanitized
- Test that the XSS payload is no longer executed in the vulnerable parameter
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-28475 — 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-2023-28475 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