CVE-2023-29051
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 · uneditedUser-defined OXMF templates could be used to access a limited part of the internal OX App Suite Java API. The existing switch to disable the feature by default was not effective in this case. Unauthorized users could discover and modify application state, including objects related to other users and contexts. We now make sure that the switch to disable user-generated templates by default works as intended and will remove the feature in future generations of the product. No publicly available exploits are known.
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 confidenceOX App Suite OXMF templates had a bypass in the feature disable switch, allowing unauthorized users to access internal Java APIs and modify application state across other users and contexts.
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< 7.10.6= 7.10.6= 8.17CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 OX App Suite installation and versionLocate the OX App Suite installation directory or run the command to retrieve the installed version (for example, checking package manager, configuration files, or using the ox version command if available).Affected if The installed version is less than 7.10.6, equals 7.10.6, or equals 8.17.
-
Verify OXMF templates feature statusInspect the OX App Suite configuration files or admin panel to determine whether the OXMF templates feature is enabled or disabled. Look for settings related to 'oxmf', 'templates', or 'user-generated templates'.Affected if The OXMF templates feature is enabled and user-generated templates are allowed.
-
Check the disable switch configurationLocate the configuration parameter that controls the ability for users to create or access internal Java API templates. This may be in the server configuration, context settings, or a specific OXMF-related setting.Affected if The disable switch exists but can be bypassed, or the configuration allows unauthenticated or unauthorized access to internal Java APIs through templates.
-
Inspect template access permissionsReview user permissions and context settings to verify whether regular users can access internal Java APIs or modify application state across other users through the OXMF template mechanism.Affected if Non-privileged users can access internal Java APIs or modify data outside their own context.
You are affected if OX App Suite version is 7.10.6, 8.17, or below 7.10.6 AND the OXMF templates feature is enabled, allowing unauthorized access to internal Java APIs.
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 data7.10.6
Apply vendor patch to ensure the disable switch functions correctly; verify that user-generated templates are properly disabled and monitor for any unauthorized access.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,816.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-29051 — 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-2023-29051 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