Testng ResultsApplication · Jenkins
CVE-2023-32984
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 · uneditedJenkins TestNG Results Plugin 730.v4c5283037693 and earlier does not escape several values that are parsed from TestNG report files and displayed on the plugin's test information pages, resulting in a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exploitable by attackers able to provide a crafted TestNG report file.
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 confidenceThe Jenkins TestNG Results Plugin fails to escape multiple values extracted from TestNG report XML files before rendering them on the plugin's test information pages. An attacker can embed malicious JavaScript in a crafted TestNG report file; when users view the test results in Jenkins, the payload executes in their browsers.
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
Testng ResultsApplication
<= 730.v4c5283037693CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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.
-
Verify TestNG Results Plugin is installedIn Jenkins, go to Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed tab and search for 'TestNG Results' in the list of installed plugins.Affected if The TestNG Results plugin appears in the installed plugins list.
-
Check the installed version of the pluginIn the Installed plugins list, locate the TestNG Results Plugin and note the version number displayed in the 'Version' column.Affected if The version number is 730.v4c5283037693 or earlier (any version less than or equal to 730.v4c5283037693).
-
Identify jobs using TestNG report publishingReview Jenkins job configurations: for each job, go to Configure > Post-build Actions and check if 'Publish TestNG Results' is listed as a post-build action.Affected if One or more jobs are configured to publish TestNG results (the plugin is actively being used).
-
Determine who can upload TestNG XML report filesReview job configurations and any related permissions: check if anonymous users or untrusted users have the ability to upload or trigger jobs that process TestNG XML report files.Affected if Users who are not fully trusted can upload TestNG report XML files to Jenkins jobs.
A user is affected if the TestNG Results Plugin version is 730.v4c5283037693 or earlier AND the plugin is installed and being used to publish TestNG results from report XML files.
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 the TestNG Results Plugin to version 730.v4c5283037694 or later, which includes proper escaping of report values. Until then, restrict who can upload TestNG report files to trusted users only.
Fix this in Testng Results
Scoped from the published advisory
- 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-2023-32984 — 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-2023-32984 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