CVE-2023-40221
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 · uneditedThe absence of filters when loading some sections in the web application of the vulnerable device allows potential attackers to inject malicious code that will be interpreted when a legitimate user accesses the web section (MAIL SERVER) where the information is displayed. Injection can be done on parameter MAIL_RCV. When a legitimate user attempts to review NOTIFICATION/MAIL SERVER, the injected code will be executed.
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 stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the web application of a network device. The MAIL_RCV parameter in the MAIL SERVER section lacks input filtering, allowing attackers to inject malicious JavaScript code that executes when legitimate users access the NOTIFICATION/MAIL SERVER page.
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= 01.12.10CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/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 device firmware versionAccess the device's web interface or CLI and locate the firmware version information, typically found in System Info, Status, or About pagesAffected if Firmware version is exactly 01.12.10
-
Verify web application is accessibleConfirm the network device's web management interface is reachable over HTTP/HTTPSAffected if Web interface is accessible and exposes the mail server configuration
-
Locate MAIL SERVER configuration sectionNavigate to the NOTIFICATION or MAIL SERVER section within the device's web interfaceAffected if The MAIL SERVER configuration page exists and is accessible
-
Inspect MAIL_RCV parameterView the current value of the MAIL_RCV (mail recipient) field in the MAIL SERVER settingsAffected if The MAIL_RCV parameter accepts input and is stored without sanitization, allowing script injection
A user is affected if the device runs Socomec Modulys Gp Firmware version 01.12.10 and the web-based MAIL SERVER configuration with the MAIL_RCV parameter is 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 dataImplement robust input validation and output encoding for the MAIL_RCV parameter and all user-supplied inputs in the mail server configuration sections. Use context-appropriate escaping when displaying stored values to prevent script execution.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-40221 — 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-2023-40221 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