CVE-2023-32792
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 · uneditedCross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in NXLog Manager 5.6.5633 version. This vulnerability allows an attacker to eliminate roles within the platform by sending a specifically crafted query to the server. The vulnerability is based on the absence of proper validation of the origin of incoming requests.
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 confidenceCross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in NXLog Manager 5.6.5633 allows attackers to eliminate roles by sending crafted requests. The server fails to validate the origin of incoming requests, enabling attackers to trick authenticated users into performing unintended state-changing actions (role deletion).
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= 5.6.5633CVSS 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.
-
Confirm NXLog Manager versionLocate and inspect the NXLog Manager version information. This is typically found in the product documentation, about page within the web interface, or in the installation files. Check the application startup logs or configuration files for the exact version string.Affected if The installed version is exactly 5.6.5633
-
Verify web interface accessibilityDetermine if the NXLog Manager web interface is accessible. This is typically hosted on a specific port (default 9441 or similar). Access the login page and confirm the application responds.Affected if The web interface is accessible and accepts authentication
-
Confirm role management functionality existsLog into the NXLog Manager web interface and navigate to the administrative or user management section. Identify if role management features are available and can be accessed by authenticated users.Affected if Role management interface is present and accessible to authenticated users
-
Check for anti-CSRF protection in role operationsInspect the HTTP requests and responses when performing role management operations. Examine the form submissions or API calls for role deletion to determine if anti-CSRF tokens, Origin header validation, or SameSite cookie attributes are implemented.Affected if Role deletion requests lack anti-CSRF tokens and do not validate Origin/Referer headers
You are affected if NXLog Manager version is exactly 5.6.5633 and the role management functionality is accessible without proper CSRF token validation on sensitive operations.
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 for all role management operations and validate Origin/Referer headers on sensitive requests. Additionally, configure SameSite cookie attributes to provide defense-in-depth protection against CSRF attacks.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-32792 — 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-2023-32792 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