Build Of QuarkusApplication · Redhat
CVE-2023-2974
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was found in quarkus-core. This vulnerability occurs because the TLS protocol configured with quarkus.http.ssl.protocols is not enforced, and the client can force the selection of the weaker supported TLS protocol.
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 confidenceIn Quarkus, the quarkus.http.ssl.protocols configuration intended to restrict TLS connections to specific protocol versions (e.g., TLS 1.2+) is not properly enforced. An attacker negotiating an SSL/TLS handshake can override server preferences and force the use of weaker supported protocols like TLS 1.0 or TLS 1.1, exposing connections to known cryptographic weaknesses in legacy protocols.
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
Build Of QuarkusApplication
< 2.13.8CVSS 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 Quarkus versionReview your project pom.xml for the quarkus-bom or quarkus-core version, or check the build artifacts/logs. Alternatively, query the Quarkus application at runtime for its version endpoint if available.Affected if The installed Quarkus version is below 2.13.8 (e.g., 2.13.7, 2.13.0, 2.12.x, etc.)
-
Locate SSL/TLS configurationSearch for 'quarkus.http.ssl' configuration in your application.properties or application.yaml file, or any external configuration source that Quarkus reads.Affected if SSL/TLS is enabled via quarkus.http.ssl.configuration with any protocol restrictions set via quarkus.http.ssl.protocols
-
Check configured SSL protocolsInspect the quarkus.http.ssl.protocols value in your configuration. If not explicitly set, the default behavior allows protocol negotiation.Affected if quarkus.http.ssl.protocols is set but allows TLS 1.0 or TLS 1.1, or if the property is unset (default behavior accepts any supported protocol)
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 · scoped2.13.8
Ensure Quarkus is updated to a version where this issue is fixed. If immediate patching is not possible, implement additional controls at the load balancer or reverse proxy level to enforce strong TLS protocols and reject downgrade attempts.
2.13.8 or later stable release
- Upgrade Quarkus to version 2.13.8 or later (e.g., 2.13.8.Final or later stable release)
- Verify the fix by testing that the TLS protocol configured via quarkus.http.ssl.protocols is properly enforced and cannot be downgraded by clients
- Ensure that server-side TLS configuration explicitly disables legacy protocols (TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1) if not already done
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Build Of Quarkus
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-2974 — 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-2023-2974 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