CVE-2023-43623
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 · uneditedA vulnerability has been identified in Mendix Forgot Password (Mendix 10 compatible) (All versions < V5.4.0), Mendix Forgot Password (Mendix 7 compatible) (All versions < V3.7.3), Mendix Forgot Password (Mendix 8 compatible) (All versions < V4.1.3), Mendix Forgot Password (Mendix 9 compatible) (All versions < V5.4.0). Applications using the affected module are vulnerable to user enumeration due to distinguishable responses. This could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to determine if a user is valid or not, enabling a brute force attack with valid users.
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 confidenceThe Mendix Forgot Password module returns distinguishable responses for valid versus invalid usernames, allowing unauthenticated attackers to enumerate valid user accounts. This information can then be used to target specific accounts in brute-force 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< 3.7.3>= 4.0.0, < 4.1.3>= 5.0.0, < 5.4.0CVSS 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.
-
Identify if Forgot Password module is deployedReview your Mendix application project structure or deployment artifacts for the presence of the 'ForgotPassword' or 'Forgot_ password' module directoryAffected if The Forgot Password module is present in your deployment
-
Determine Forgot Password module versionLocate the module's metadata file (typically in the project folder or deployment package) and read the module version from the module version file or manifestAffected if The installed version is less than 3.7.3, OR between 4.0.0 and 4.1.3 (exclusive), OR between 5.0.0 and 5.4.0 (exclusive)
-
Test password reset response differentiationSubmit a forgot password request using a known-valid username/email and observe the response, then submit a request using a random/invalid username/email and compare the response messages, error codes, or timingAffected if The responses differ meaningfully between valid and invalid usernames (for example, distinct error messages like 'user not found' versus 'password reset email sent' or different HTTP status codes)
You are affected if the Forgot Password module is deployed with a version in the affected ranges AND it returns distinguishable responses for valid versus invalid usernames during password reset requests.
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 · scoped3.7.34.1.35.4.0
Upgrade the Mendix Forgot Password module to version V5.4.0 (Mendix 9/10), V4.1.3 (Mendix 8), or V3.7.3 (Mendix 7) to ensure uniform response messages for both valid and invalid usernames.
Mendix Forgot Password: 3.7.3 (Mendix 7), 4.1.3 (Mendix 8), or 5.4.0 (Mendix 9/10)
- 1. Identify the Mendix version used by your application (7, 8, 9, or 10)
- 2. Locate the Mendix Forgot Password module in your project
- 3. Download the fixed version from the Mendix App Store or your organization's software repository: For Mendix 7 use version 3.7.3; For Mendix 8 use version 4.1.3; For Mendix 9 or 10 use version 5.4.0
- 4. In Mendix Studio Pro, go to the 'App' menu and select 'Update module' or manually replace the module files
- 5. Run the application locally and verify the forgot password functionality works correctly
- 6. Test that the application now returns uniform responses regardless of whether a user account exists
- 7. Deploy the updated application to production environments
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,544.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-43623 — 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-2023-43623 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