CVE-2023-37411
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 5.0.6 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM X-Force ID: 260139.
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 5.0.0-5.0.6 contains a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the web interface. Attackers can inject malicious JavaScript code into web pages that will execute in the browsers of other users viewing the content, potentially allowing session hijacking and credential theft within trusted sessions.
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, <= 5.0.6CVSS 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 Faspex versionAccess the web interface and navigate to the About or Help section, or check the application version via the administrative console. If CLI access is available, use the faspex version command or check the installation directory for version files.Affected if The installed version falls within 5.0.0 through 5.0.6 inclusive.
-
Confirm web interface is accessibleVerify that the Aspera Faspex web interface is enabled and reachable by attempting to access the application URL (typically on port 443 or 8443).Affected if The web interface is active and exposed to users.
-
Review application logs for suspicious inputExamine Faspex server logs in the installation logs directory for entries containing unusual script tags, javascript: URIs, or HTML tags in user-submitted fields such as file names, metadata, or user profile fields.Affected if Log entries show unescaped HTML or script tags were processed and stored by the application.
-
Inspect Content Security Policy headersUse browser developer tools or a command-line tool (curl) to inspect HTTP response headers from the Faspex web interface for the presence and configuration of CSP headers.Affected if CSP headers are missing, weak, or allow inline script execution (unsafe-inline).
You are affected if IBM Aspera Faspex version 5.0.0 through 5.0.6 is installed and the web interface is enabled, regardless of CSP configuration.
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 IBM Aspera Faspex to version 5.0.7 or later which contains the vendor patch. Until patched, implement Content Security Policy (CSP) headers and validate/sanitize all user-supplied input in the application.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-37411 — 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-2023-37411 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