Mashup PortletsApplication · Jenkins
CVE-2023-28679
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 · uneditedJenkins Mashup Portlets Plugin 1.1.2 and earlier provides the "Generic JS Portlet" feature that lets a user populate a portlet using a custom JavaScript expression, resulting in a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exploitable by authenticated attackers with Overall/Read permission.
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 confidenceThe Jenkins Mashup Portlets Plugin versions 1.1.2 and earlier contains a stored XSS vulnerability in its 'Generic JS Portlet' feature. This feature allows users to populate portlets using custom JavaScript expressions without proper sanitization, allowing authenticated attackers with Overall/Read permission to inject malicious scripts that execute when other users view the affected portlet.
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
Mashup PortletsApplication
<= 1.1.2CVSS 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.
-
Verify Mashup Portlets plugin is installedGo to Jenkins > Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed and search for 'Mashup Portlets' in the list of installed pluginsAffected if The plugin appears in the installed plugins list and the version is 1.1.2 or earlier
-
Confirm the plugin version is vulnerableIn the installed plugins list, locate the Mashup Portlets plugin and note the Version column; compare this version to 1.1.2Affected if The installed version is 1.1.2 or any version earlier than 1.1.2
-
Identify if Generic JS Portlet feature is in useNavigate to Jenkins > Manage Dashboard (or relevant dashboard configuration) and look for portlets configured using the 'Generic JS Portlet' typeAffected if Any portlet is configured with the Generic JS Portlet type, as this feature lacks sanitization for custom JavaScript expressions
-
Inspect JavaScript content in configured portletsClick on each Generic JS Portlet configuration and examine the JavaScript expression fields for any suspicious or unrecognized script code, encoded characters, or unexpected function callsAffected if The JavaScript fields contain unsanitized user-supplied content that could represent injected malicious scripts visible to other users
You are affected if the Mashup Portlets plugin is installed at version 1.1.2 or earlier AND the Generic JS Portlet feature is configured with any custom JavaScript expressions viewable by other users.
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 dataUpgrade the Mashup Portlets Plugin to version 1.2.0 or later, which contains the fix for this vulnerability. If the plugin is not needed, consider removing it entirely.
Fix this in Mashup Portlets
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-28679 — 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-2023-28679 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