CVE-2023-3589
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 · uneditedA Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability affecting Teamwork Cloud from No Magic Release 2021x through No Magic Release 2022x could allow with some very specific conditions an attacker to send a specifically crafted query to the server.
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 confidenceThis is a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Teamwork Cloud versions 2021x through 2022x. The flaw allows an attacker to induce an authenticated user to send specially crafted queries to the server under specific conditions, potentially executing unauthorized actions on behalf of the victim user.
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= 2021x= 2022xCVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/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 installed Teamwork Cloud versionAccess the administration interface or check system information files to determine the exact version number of the 3ds Teamwork Cloud installationAffected if The installed version is 2021x or 2022x (any minor release within these major versions)
-
Verify CSRF token presence in state-changing requestsInspect HTTP requests that perform state-changing operations (such as user management, project modifications, or configuration changes) and check whether each request includes a CSRF token parameter or headerAffected if State-changing requests lack a CSRF token parameter or header and rely solely on session authentication
-
Check SameSite cookie attribute on session cookiesUse browser developer tools or a network capture tool to inspect the Set-Cookie headers for session cookies and verify if the SameSite attribute is set to Strict or LaxAffected if Session cookies are missing the SameSite attribute or have it set to None without the Secure flag
-
Confirm authentication mechanismDetermine whether the application relies solely on session-based authentication without additional CSRF countermeasures such as double-submit cookies or custom headersAffected if The application uses session cookies for authentication without CSRF protections like synchronizer tokens
A user is affected if their Teamwork Cloud version is 2021x or 2022x and the application lacks CSRF tokens on state-changing requests or does not have SameSite attributes configured on session cookies.
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 CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) for all state-changing requests and configure SameSite cookie attributes. Alternatively, enable SameSite=Strict/Lax on session cookies as a defense-in-depth measure.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-3589 — 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-2023-3589 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