CVE-2023-45228
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 · uneditedThe application suffers from improper access control when editing users. A user with read permissions can manipulate users, passwords, and permissions by sending a single HTTP POST request with modified parameters.
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 confidenceThis is a Broken Access Control vulnerability where the application fails to properly enforce authorization on user management endpoints. A user with only read permissions can bypass access controls by sending HTTP POST requests with modified parameters, allowing them to edit other users, change passwords, and modify permissions despite lacking write access.
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 dataall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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 modelAccess the transmitter web interface or check the device label/documentation to confirm it is a Sielco Analog FM Transmitter model (Exc5000gx, Exc120gx, Exc300gx, Exc1600gx, Exc2000gx, Exc1000gx, Exc3000gx, or Exc30gt)Affected if The device is any of the listed Sielco Analog FM Transmitter models
-
Confirm firmware versionCheck the firmware version in the device web interface (usually under System Info, Status, or About section) or via SNMP/sysinfo queryAffected if The firmware version is any version (all versions are affected according to the vendor)
-
Check user accounts and rolesLog into the web interface with an account that has read-only permissions and review what user roles and permissions are defined in the systemAffected if The system has user accounts with role-based permissions (read-only vs write/admin)
-
Test authorization bypass on user management endpointsUsing a read-only user session, send HTTP POST requests to user management endpoints (such as /user/edit, /user/password, /user/permissions) with modified parameters to attempt editing other users, changing passwords, or modifying permissionsAffected if A read-only user can successfully perform write operations on user management endpoints despite lacking write permissions
If the device is a Sielco Analog FM Transmitter (any Exc series model listed) and a read-only user can perform administrative actions via HTTP POST requests, the system is affected by this CVE.
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 server-side authorization checks that verify the authenticated user has write permissions before processing any user management operations (create, update, delete, password changes). All user management endpoints must validate permissions on each request, not just trust client-side controls or session attributes.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-45228 — 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-2023-45228 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