CVE-2023-37398
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 · uneditedIBM Aspera Faspex 5.0.0 through 5.0.10 does not require that users should have strong passwords by default, which makes it easier for attackers to compromise user accounts.
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 confidenceIBM Aspera Faspex versions 5.0.0 through 5.0.10 ships with default settings that do not enforce strong password requirements, allowing weak or easily guessable passwords to be set by users. This configuration weakness enables attackers to more easily compromise user accounts through credential-based attacks.
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>= 5.0.0, <= 5.0.10CVSS 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.
-
Verify Aspera Faspex versionLocate the installed Aspera Faspex version number through the administration console about page, installation directory, or package management system. Compare against the affected range: 5.0.0 through 5.0.10.Affected if Installed version falls within 5.0.0 to 5.0.10 inclusive and password policy is not explicitly configured.
-
Access password policy configurationLog in to the Aspera Faspex administration console and navigate to the User Management or Security settings section where password policies are defined.Affected if Password policy settings are not visible, not configured, or set to disabled.
-
Check minimum password length settingInspect the password policy configuration for the minimum length requirement parameter. Verify if it is set to a strong value (typically 8+ characters) or set to a weak/blank value.Affected if Minimum length is unset, set to 0, or set below 8 characters.
-
Check password complexity requirementsInspect the password policy configuration for complexity rules such as requirements for uppercase, lowercase, numeric, and special characters.Affected if Complexity requirements are disabled or not enforced.
-
Check password expiration policyInspect the password policy configuration for expiration period settings that require periodic password changes.Affected if Password expiration is disabled or not configured.
The environment is affected if Aspera Faspex version 5.0.0-5.0.10 is installed and the password policy has not been explicitly configured with strong requirements for length, complexity, or expiration.
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 dataEnable and configure strong password policies in the Aspera Faspex administration console, including minimum length requirements, complexity rules, and password expiration settings.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-37398 — 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-2023-37398 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