CVE-2023-35042
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 · uneditedGeoServer 2, in some configurations, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via java.lang.Runtime.getRuntime().exec in wps:LiteralData within a wps:Execute request, as exploited in the wild in June 2023. NOTE: the vendor states that they are unable to reproduce this in any version.
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 confidenceGeoServer 2 contains a remote code execution vulnerability in its WPS (Web Processing Service) component. Attackers can execute arbitrary operating system commands by injecting malicious payloads through wps:LiteralData parameters within wps:Execute requests, leveraging java.lang.Runtime.getRuntime().exec. This flaw was actively exploited in the wild in June 2023.
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>= 2.0.0CVSS 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.
-
Confirm GeoServer installation and versionLocate the GeoServer web application (commonly in /opt/geoserver, /var/lib/tomcat/webapps, or similar servlet container paths) and check the version. Look for a VERSION.txt file in the GeoServer data directory, or check theAbout > GeoServer page in the admin UI.Affected if The installed GeoServer version is 2.0.0 or higher
-
Verify WPS module is enabledLog in to the GeoServer admin UI and navigate to WPS > Settings, or check the web.xml deployment descriptor for the wps filter/filter-mapping. Alternatively, check if the wps.war module is deployed.Affected if The WPS (Web Processing Service) is enabled and accessible on the server
-
Check network accessibility of WPS endpointIdentify the WPS endpoint URL (typically /geoserver/wps) and verify whether it is accessible from untrusted networks. Review firewall rules, reverse proxy configurations, and any IP-based access controls.Affected if The WPS endpoint is exposed to the internet or untrusted networks without IP restrictions
-
Review WPS request logs for suspicious activityExamine GeoServer log files (usually in logs/ folder within the GeoServer data directory) for wps:Execute requests containing suspicious patterns such as Runtime, getRuntime, exec, or shell metacharacters in LiteralData parameters.Affected if Logs show wps:Execute requests with malicious command injection patterns in LiteralData parameters
You are affected if GeoServer version 2.0.0 or higher is running with WPS enabled and accessible.
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 dataIf WPS is not required in production, disable the service entirely. Otherwise, implement strict input validation on wps:LiteralData parameters and consider network-level restrictions to limit exposure to trusted sources.
- 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-2023-35042 — 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-2023-35042 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