CVE-2023-42765
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 attacker with access to the vulnerable software could introduce arbitrary JavaScript by injecting a cross-site scripting payload into the "username" parameter in the SNMP configuration.
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 confidenceA stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the SNMP configuration interface where the 'username' parameter does not properly sanitize user input before rendering. An attacker with access to the software can inject arbitrary JavaScript payloads into the username field, which will execute when other users view the SNMP configuration.
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= 4.24CVSS 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 the device modelLocate the physical device or check network inventory records to confirm the exact model is Westermo L206 F2gAffected if The device is a Westermo L206 F2g unit
-
Check the firmware versionAccess the device admin interface or use SNMP/CLI to query the installed firmware version. Common methods include logging into the web interface or running 'show version' via console/SSHAffected if The firmware version is exactly 4.24
-
Verify SNMP is enabledCheck the device configuration for active SNMP settings. This can be done via the web interface under SNMP/Network settings, or by querying SNMP OIDs, or using CLI commands like 'show snmp'Affected if SNMP is enabled and configured on the device
-
Access SNMP user configurationNavigate to the SNMP configuration section in the device web interface or use CLI to view SNMP user settings. Look for fields related to SNMP users or community stringsAffected if You can access the SNMP user configuration interface
-
Inspect the SNMP username fieldExamine the SNMP username parameter for any suspicious characters or patterns that indicate injected script tags, such as <script>, javascript:, or encoded variants. Check both the displayed value and the underlying configurationAffected if The username field contains HTML tags, script elements, or suspicious JavaScript patterns like event handlers (onload, onerror, etc.)
You are affected if you have a Westermo L206 F2g device running firmware version 4.24 with SNMP enabled, and the SNMP username field contains any script injection payloads.
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 proper input validation and output encoding/escaping for the username parameter in SNMP configuration pages to prevent JavaScript injection. Use context-appropriate encoding when displaying user-supplied values.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-42765 — 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-2023-42765 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