CVE-2023-33943
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 scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Account module in Liferay Portal 7.4.3.21 through 7.4.3.62, and Liferay DXP 7.4 update 21 through 62 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via a crafted payload injected into a user's (1) First Name, (2) Middle Name, (3) Last Name, or (4) Job Title text field.
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 confidenceStored XSS vulnerability in Lifford Portal/DXP Account module allows remote attackers to inject malicious scripts via user profile fields (First Name, Middle Name, Last Name, Job Title). The injected payload executes when other users view the affected profile data.
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= 7.4>= 7.4.3.21, <= 7.4.3.62CVSS 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.
-
Identify installed Liffel Portal or DXP versionCheck the Liffel Portal/DXP version through the Control Panel > Configuration > Server Administration > Product Information, or inspect the portal-ext.properties file for the version property. Alternatively, access the /c/portal/maintenance endpoint or check the WAR file manifest.Affected if The version is 7.4.3.21 through 7.4.3.62 inclusive, or exactly 7.4 (indicating an unpatched 7.4 baseline)
-
Verify Account module is in useNavigate to Control Panel > Users > Accounts or check if the Account portlet/module is deployed and accessible in the Liffel instance. Inspect the modules or OSGi console for com_liferay_account_web or similar Account-related bundles.Affected if The Account module is installed and users have access to create or edit account entries with profile fields
-
Inspect user profile field configurationAccess the Account module configuration at Control Panel > Users > Accounts > [Select Account] > Account Members, or check the Account Entry form definition in the Control Panel. Review whether First Name, Middle Name, Last Name, or Job Title fields are exposed for user input.Affected if Any of the four affected fields (First Name, Middle Name, Last Name, Job Title) are exposed as editable fields in the Account module interface
-
Check for existing malicious payloads in profile dataQuery the AccountEntry table in the database for the fields userFirstName, userMiddleName, userLastName, or inspect via Control Panel > Users > Accounts by viewing raw field data. Look for script tags, event handlers (onload, onerror, onclick), or encoded JavaScript in these four fields.Affected if Any of these fields contain unsanitized HTML or JavaScript vectors such as <script>, javascript:, or HTML event handlers
A user is affected if their Liffel Portal/DXP version falls within 7.4.3.21-7.4.3.62 or is 7.4, the Account module is active, and any profile fields (First Name, Middle Name, Last Name, Job Title) can be edited without proper output encoding.
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 · scopedUpgrade to Lifford Portal 7.4.3.63+ or Lifford DXP 7.4 update 63+, or apply vendor patch. Implement input validation and output encoding on all four affected user profile fields.
Liferay Portal 7.4.3.63+ / Liferay DXP 7.4 update 63+
- 1. Back up your current Liferway Portal/DXP database and deployment
- 2. Download Liferay Portal 7.4.3.63 or later from the official Liferay marketplace or customer portal
- 3. Stop the Liferay application server
- 4. Replace the existing Liferay deployment files with the new version
- 5. Clear the Liferay OSGi cache and temporary files
- 6. Start the Liferay application server
- 7. Verify the Account module functionality and test that XSS payloads in First Name, Middle Name, Last Name, and Job Title fields are properly sanitized
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2023-33943 — 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-2023-33943 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