CVE-2023-29926
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 · uneditedPowerJob V4.3.2 has unauthorized interface that causes remote code execution.
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 · moderate confidencePowerJob V4.3.2 contains an unauthorized interface that allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and execute arbitrary code on the affected system. The vulnerability stems from missing or insufficient access controls on specific API endpoints, enabling unauthenticated RCE.
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= 4.3.2CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 if PowerJob is running in the environmentCheck for running processes or services named 'powerjob', or look for Java processes listening on common PowerJob ports (typically 8088 or 7700) using commands like 'netstat -tlnp' or 'ss -tlnp'Affected if PowerJob service is running and exposed on a network-accessible interface
-
Determine the installed PowerJob versionCheck the application's JAR file name, WAR file name, or look for version information in the build artifacts, configuration files, or the startup logs. The affected version is specifically 4.3.2Affected if The installed version is exactly 4.3.2 (exact match to the single affected version)
-
Verify if the PowerJob management API is network-exposedAttempt to access common PowerJob API endpoints from an unauthorized network location, such as /api/jobInfo or /api/system/info, using curl or similar HTTP client without providing credentialsAffected if The API endpoints respond without requiring authentication (HTTP 200 instead of 401/403)
-
Check for unauthenticated API endpoint accessibilitySend HTTP requests to PowerJob API endpoints (particularly those related to job execution or system configuration) without any authentication tokens and observe the responseAffected if API endpoints allow unauthenticated access and return valid JSON responses instead of authentication errors
You are affected if PowerJob version 4.3.2 is running and its API endpoints are accessible without authentication on a network-exposed interface.
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 PowerJob to the latest patched version. If immediate patching is not feasible, implement network segmentation or firewall rules to restrict external access to the PowerJob management interface.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-29926 — 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-2023-29926 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