CVE-2023-28949
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 · uneditedIBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS 9.7.2.7 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM X-Force ID: 251216.
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 confidenceIBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS 9.7.2.7 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery (CSRF). This allows an attacker to craft malicious requests that are executed in the context of an authenticated user's session, enabling unauthorized actions to be performed without the user's knowledge.
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= 9.7.2.7= 9.7.2.7CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/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 installed DOORS versionCheck the installed version of IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS by accessing the About dialog in the client application or checking the installation directory for version information. For command-line, run: doors.exe -version or check the install log.Affected if The installed version is exactly 9.7.2.7
-
Identify installed DOORS Web Access versionIf using the web interface, check the DOORS Web Access server version through the application's help or admin pages, or check the server installation logs and configuration files.Affected if The DOORS Web Access version is exactly 9.7.2.7
-
Inspect web forms for anti-CSRF tokensLog into DOORS Web Access and navigate to forms that perform state-changing actions such as creating, modifying, or deleting requirements. View the page source (right-click > View Page Source) and search for hidden input fields containing token values (such as 'csrf', 'token', 'xsrf' or similar) within the form tags.Affected if No anti-CSRF token hidden fields are present in state-changing forms, indicating the application lacks CSRF protection for those operations
-
Verify SameSite cookie attribute configurationOpen browser developer tools (F12), go to the Application tab, and examine cookies for the DOORS Web Access domain. Check if the SameSite attribute is set to 'Strict' or 'Lax' on session and authentication cookies.Affected if Cookies do not have SameSite attribute configured or it is set to 'None' without secure flags, indicating vulnerable cross-origin cookie transmission
You are affected if you are running exactly version 9.7.2.7 of DOORS or DOORS Web Access and state-changing web operations lack anti-CSRF token protection or proper SameSite cookie configuration.
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 dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) on all state-changing operations and configure SameSite cookie attributes to prevent cross-origin requests.
- Consultation2.0 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 $4,480.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-28949 — 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-2023-28949 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