CVE-2023-41166
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in Stormshield Network Security (SNS) 3.7.0 through 3.7.39, 3.11.0 through 3.11.27, 4.3.0 through 4.3.22, 4.6.0 through 4.6.9, and 4.7.0 through 4.7.1. It's possible to know if a specific user account exists on the SNS firewall by using remote access commands.
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 an information disclosure vulnerability in Stormshield Network Security (SNS) firewalls across multiple version ranges (3.7.0-3.7.39, 3.11.0-3.11.27, 4.3.0-4.3.22, 4.6.0-4.6.9, 4.7.0-4.7.1). An unauthenticated remote attacker can determine whether specific user accounts exist on the firewall by sending certain remote access commands. This user enumeration capability aids in targeted 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>= 3.7.0, <= 3.7.39>= 3.11.0, <= 3.11.27>= 4.3.0, < 4.3.23>= 4.6.0, < 4.6.10>= 4.7.0, < 4.7.2CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/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.
-
Determine SNS firmware versionAccess the firewall CLI and run 'version' or check via the web administration interface under System > Status or DashboardAffected if The installed version falls within 3.7.0-3.7.39, 3.11.0-3.11.27, 4.3.0-4.3.22, 4.6.0-4.6.9, or 4.7.0-4.7.1
-
Verify remote administration interface accessibilityConfirm whether the firewall's admin web interface (port 443) or CLI over SSH is exposed to untrusted networksAffected if Remote management interfaces are reachable from networks outside your trusted administrative zone
-
Check remote access authentication settingsReview the firewall's remote access configuration via the admin panel under Configuration > Users > Remote access or via CLI show commands for remote auth settingsAffected if Remote user authentication is enabled and allows connections from unauthenticated or untrusted sources
-
Audit enabled user accountsList local user accounts configured on the firewall via Users > Local users or CLI command 'user list'Affected if Any local user accounts exist on the firewall, as the vulnerability allows enumeration of these accounts
You are affected if your SNS version is within the affected ranges AND the remote administration interface is accessible from untrusted networks, allowing an unauthenticated attacker to enumerate valid user accounts.
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.
dbcve · scoped4.3.234.6.104.7.2
Apply the vendor-supplied patch/upgrade to a fixed SNS version. As an interim control, restrict network access to the firewall's management interfaces to trusted IP addresses only.
Upgrade to the fixed release for your version branch: 3.7.40, 3.11.28, 4.3.23, 4.6.10, or the latest stable 4.7.x release
- 1. Identify the current SNS version by checking the firewall administration interface or running 'CLI version' command
- 2. Determine which version branch (3.7.x, 3.11.x, 4.3.x, 4.6.x, or 4.7.x) is currently in use
- 3. For branch 3.7.x: Plan upgrade to version 3.7.40 or later
- 4. For branch 3.11.x: Plan upgrade to version 3.11.28 or later
- 5. For branch 4.3.x: Plan upgrade to version 4.3.23 or later
- 6. For branch 4.6.x: Plan upgrade to version 4.6.10 or later
- 7. For branch 4.7.x: Plan upgrade to version 4.7.2 or later (if available) or next stable 4.7.x release
- 8. Before upgrading, review Stormshield release notes for any migration requirements
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-41166 — 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-2023-41166 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