CVE-2023-4659
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 · uneditedCross-Site Request Forgery vulnerability, whose exploitation could allow an attacker to perform different actions on the platform as an administrator, simply by changing the token value to "admin". It is also possible to perform POST, GET and DELETE requests without any token value. Therefore, an unprivileged remote user is able to create, delete and modify users within theapplication.
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 confidenceThis is a critical CSRF vulnerability where token validation can be completely bypassed. The application accepts 'admin' as a valid token value, and several endpoints (POST, GET, DELETE) function without any token verification. This allows unauthenticated attackers to create, modify, and delete users by forging requests.
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= 1.1.1CVSS 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 Free5gc installation versionRun version check command or inspect package metadata to identify installed Free5gc version (e.g., free5gc --version or check RPM/deb package)Affected if Installed version is exactly 1.1.1
-
Identify web interface exposureCheck if Free5gc web console or API endpoints are accessible over network (review firewall rules, reverse proxy config, or running services on ports 80/443/8080)Affected if Web interface or REST API is exposed to network (especially untrusted networks)
-
Locate CSRF token implementationSearch source code for CSRF token generation and validation logic - look for token handling in web controller files, session management code, or middleware that validates request tokensAffected if Code uses weak or predictable tokens, or accepts hardcoded values like 'admin' as valid tokens
-
Test token validation behaviorSend authenticated HTTP requests (POST/DELETE) to user management endpoints with missing, invalid, or 'admin' as CSRF token value and observe server responseAffected if Server accepts requests with token value 'admin' or processes requests without requiring valid token
-
Inspect session cookie configurationExamine session cookie attributes in application config or HTTP response headers for SameSite and Secure flagsAffected if SameSite attribute is missing, set to None, or Secure flag is not enabled on session cookies
Environment is affected if Free5gc version 1.1.1 is running with an exposed web interface where CSRF token validation accepts 'admin' as a valid token or lacks proper token verification on user management endpoints.
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 CSRF token validation using cryptographically random tokens, validate tokens server-side without relying on client-supplied values, and set SameSite=Strict or SameSite=Lax attributes on session cookies to prevent cross-origin requests.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-4659 — 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-2023-4659 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