ZanataApplication · Jenkins
CVE-2023-46660
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 · uneditedJenkins Zanata Plugin 0.6 and earlier uses a non-constant time comparison function when checking whether the provided and expected webhook token hashes are equal, potentially allowing attackers to use statistical methods to obtain a valid webhook token.
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 Jenkins Zanata Plugin versions 0.6 and earlier uses a non-constant time comparison function when validating webhook tokens. This allows attackers to perform timing attacks by measuring response times to deduce valid tokens character-by-character through statistical analysis, since the comparison returns early upon finding the first mismatched character.
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
ZanataApplication
<= 0.6CVSS 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 Jenkins Zanata Plugin is installedNavigate to Jenkins > Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed tab and search for Zanata, or list installed plugins via Jenkins CLI/APIAffected if The Zanata plugin appears in the installed plugins list
-
Determine the installed Zanata Plugin versionView the plugin details in Jenkins > Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed tab, or check the plugin's manifest file (${JENKINS_HOME}/plugins/zanata/WEB-INF/lib/*.jar META-INF/MANIFEST.MF)Affected if The version is 0.6 or any version lower than 0.6
-
Check if webhook integration is configuredNavigate to Jenkins > Manage Jenkins > Configure System > Zanata settings, or check job configurations for Zanata-related webhook URLsAffected if Webhook endpoints are configured or webhook URLs are exposed in job configurations
-
Verify webhook tokens exist in the environmentInspect Jenkins configuration files or the Zanata plugin's configuration XML files for webhookToken fields, or check for stored credentials related to Zanata webhooksAffected if Webhook tokens or credentials are present in the Jenkins configuration
A user is affected if the Jenkins Zanata Plugin version 0.6 or earlier is installed AND webhook tokens are configured or in use, as the timing attack vulnerability only applies when webhook validation occurs.
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 dataUpgrade to a fixed version of the Zanata Plugin that implements constant-time comparison for webhook token validation. If no patched version is available, rotate any exposed webhook tokens and monitor for anomalous timing patterns.
Fix this in Zanata
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-46660 — 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-2023-46660 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