CVE-2023-4494
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 · uneditedStack-based buffer overflow vulnerability in Easy Chat Server 3.1 version. An attacker could send an excessively long username string to the register.ghp file asking for the name via a GET request resulting in arbitrary code execution on the remote machine.
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 confidenceA stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in Easy Chat Server 3.1. The application fails to properly validate the length of username input when processing a GET request to register.ghp. By sending an excessively long string, an attacker can overwrite stack memory and achieve arbitrary code execution on the affected system.
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= 3.1CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/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.
-
Confirm Easy Chat Server is installedCheck system for Easy Chat Server installation directories or installed programs. Common paths may include C:\Program Files\Easy Chat Server or similar. Also check Windows Services for 'Easy Chat Server'.Affected if Easy Chat Server software is found on the system
-
Verify installed version is 3.1Locate the application executable or check version information in the program's main directory, About dialog, or Windows Programs and Features. Compare the version to '3.1' as listed in the affected versions.Affected if The installed version is exactly 3.1
-
Confirm register.ghp is accessibleCheck if the web application is running and the register.ghp endpoint is exposed. This is typically accessed via HTTP GET request to /register.ghp. Check the web server configuration or attempt a local request to determine if the endpoint responds.Affected if The register.ghp endpoint is accessible and responds to requests
-
Verify application is running and network-facingCheck if the Easy Chat Server service is running and listening on a network port. Use netstat or similar tools to identify listening ports associated with the application.Affected if The service is running and accepting network connections
You are affected if Easy Chat Server version 3.1 is installed, running, and the register.ghp endpoint is accessible on the network.
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 dataImmediately restrict network access to the Easy Chat Server or disable the service if possible. If a vendor patch or updated version is available, apply it urgently. Implement input validation and length checking on all user-supplied data as a compensating control until the application can be updated or replaced.
- 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-2023-4494 — 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-2023-4494 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