WebclientApplication · Icewarp

CVE-2023-39598

MEDIUM · 6.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2023-09-05
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges

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 · unedited
Cross Site Scripting vulnerability in IceWarp Corporation WebClient v.10.2.1 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via a crafted payload to the mid parameter.

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 confidence

A cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in IceWarp WebClient v10.2.1. The mid parameter in the WebClient interface does not properly sanitize user input, allowing an attacker to inject malicious JavaScript that executes in the context of the victim's browser session.

MitigationImplement robust input validation and output encoding for the mid parameter. Consider deploying Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to mitigate XSS execution. Apply the vendor patch when available.

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
WebclientApplication
Affected:= 10.2.1

CVSS 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
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify IceWarp WebClient installation
    Locate the IceWarp installation directory and check the version file or help/about section. Common paths include C:\Program Files\IceWarp\ or /var/www/html/icewarp/ on Linux. Look for version.txt, about.php, or check the HTTP response headers from the WebClient login page.
    Affected if The installed version is exactly 10.2.1
  2. Confirm WebClient interface is enabled
    Access the WebClient login page (typically at /webmail/ or /webclient/ relative to the server root). Verify the page loads successfully and displays the IceWarp login interface.
    Affected if The WebClient interface is accessible via HTTP/HTTPS and responds with the IceWarp login page
  3. Verify the mid parameter is present
    Submit a test request to the WebClient interface and examine whether the 'mid' parameter is accepted in the URL query string or form submission. This parameter typically relates to mail message IDs in the webmail interface.
    Affected if The mid parameter is accepted and processed by the WebClient interface without proper validation
  4. Check for existing input validation
    Review server-side logs for any existing XSS attempts or input validation errors related to the mid parameter. Inspect any web application firewall (WAF) or intrusion detection logs for blocked requests targeting this parameter.
    Affected if No input validation or sanitization is applied specifically to the mid parameter before it is used in the page output

A user is affected if IceWarp WebClient version 10.2.1 is installed and the WebClient interface with the mid parameter is accessible to users.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement robust input validation and output encoding for the mid parameter. Consider deploying Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to mitigate XSS execution. Apply the vendor patch when available.

Fix this in Webclient Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-39598 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-39598 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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