CVE-2023-46665
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 · uneditedSielco PolyEco1000 is vulnerable to an authentication bypass vulnerability due to an attacker modifying passwords in a POST request and gain unauthorized access to the affected device with administrative privileges.
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 confidenceThe Sielco PolyEco1000 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability where attackers can modify passwords via a crafted POST request, allowing unauthorized access to the device with administrative privileges.
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= 1.7.0= 10.16= 2.0.0= 2.0.2= 10.19= 1.9.3= 1.9.4= 2.0.6= 10.19CVSS 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.
-
Identify the device modelAccess the device web interface or check the device label/boot screen for the exact model name (Polyeco500, Polyeco300, or Polyeco1000)Affected if The device is not a Sielco PolyEco model (the vulnerability only applies to Polyeco series)
-
Check the firmware versionLog into the device web interface and navigate to System Info, Status, or About section to view the installed firmware versionAffected if The firmware version matches one of the affected versions: 1.7.0 or 10.16 for Polyeco500; 2.0.0, 2.0.2, or 10.19 for Polyeco300; 1.9.3, 1.9.4, 2.0.6, or 10.19 for Polyeco1000
-
Verify if the web management interface is network-accessibleCheck if TCP ports used by the device web interface (commonly 80, 443, or vendor-specific ports) are listening on external interfaces or accessible from untrusted networksAffected if The web management interface is exposed to untrusted networks (the vulnerability is exploited via crafted POST requests to this interface)
-
Review access logs for password-related POST requestsExamine device logs, web server logs, or syslog exports for unusual POST requests to password change or user management endpoints, especially from unexpected IP addressesAffected if There are POST requests to password modification endpoints that were not initiated by legitimate administrators
You are affected if you have a Sielco Polyeco500, Polyeco300, or Polyeco1000 device running one of the listed firmware versions with its web interface network-accessible.
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 dataUntil an official vendor patch is released, implement network segmentation to restrict access to the device, monitor for suspicious password modification requests, and consider additional authentication layers such as VPN or IP whitelisting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-46665 — 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-2023-46665 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