CVE-2023-4497
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 · uneditedEasy Chat Server, in its 3.1 version and before, does not sufficiently encrypt user-controlled inputs, resulting in a Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability stored via /registresult.htm (POST method), in the Icon parameter. The XSS is loaded from /users.ghp.
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 confidenceEasy Chat Server versions 3.1 and earlier contains a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the registration functionality. The Icon parameter in the /registresult.htm POST endpoint does not properly sanitize user input, allowing malicious JavaScript to be embedded. This payload is later executed when data is loaded and rendered from /users.ghp, affecting other users who view the 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<= 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 Easy Chat Server installation and versionCheck the application directory for version information, typically found in an about page, readme file, or the application's main executable metadata. The vulnerable version is 3.1 and earlier.Affected if The installed version is Easy Chat Server 3.1 or any earlier version.
-
Verify web server is running and accessibleConfirm the Easy Chat Server web interface is accessible by attempting to reach the server on its HTTP port (commonly port 80 or 8080). Check if the registration page loads.Affected if The web interface is exposed and reachable.
-
Confirm registration endpoint existsAccess the /registresult.htm endpoint via the web browser or curl to verify it accepts POST requests. This endpoint handles the registration form submission including the Icon parameter.Affected if The /registresult.htm endpoint is present and functional.
-
Check user list page for stored contentAccess /users.ghp to see if any user profiles with custom icons are being rendered. This is where the XSS payload would execute when viewed by other users.Affected if The /users.ghp page displays user data including icon information without proper encoding.
You are affected if Easy Chat Server version 3.1 or earlier is installed and the web-based registration functionality is accessible and functional.
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 for the Icon parameter and all user-controlled inputs in the registration form. Output should be escaped before rendering in /users.ghp to prevent script execution.
- 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-2023-4497 — 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-2023-4497 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