CkeditorWordPress extension · Cksource
CVE-2023-4771
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 · uneditedA Cross-Site scripting vulnerability has been found in CKSource CKEditor affecting versions 4.15.1 and earlier. An attacker could send malicious javascript code through the /ckeditor/samples/old/ajax.html file and retrieve an authorized user's information.
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 confidenceA reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in CKSource CKEditor versions 4.15.1 and earlier within the /ckeditor/samples/old/ajax.html sample file. Attackers can inject malicious JavaScript code via this endpoint to execute in the browser context of authorized users, potentially stealing session information or performing actions on behalf of the user.
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
CkeditorWordPress extension
<= 4.15.1CVSS 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 CKEditor versionLocate the CKEditor installation in your web application and check the version. This is typically found in a version.js file, CHANGES.md, or in the JavaScript configuration. Common locations include /ckeditor/ or /lib/ckeditor/ within your web root.Affected if The installed version is CKEditor 4.15.1 or earlier.
-
Confirm /ckeditor/samples/ directory existsCheck your web document root for the presence of the /ckeditor/samples/ directory. This directory contains the sample files shipped with CKEditor.Affected if The /ckeditor/samples/ directory exists in your web-accessible directory.
-
Verify ajax.html exists in samplesLocate and verify the file /ckeditor/samples/old/ajax.html is present. This is the specific vulnerable file mentioned in the CVE.Affected if The file /ckeditor/samples/old/ajax.html exists on the server.
-
Check web exposure of samples directoryDetermine if the /ckeditor/samples/ directory is accessible via HTTP/HTTPS from the web. Test by attempting to access a known sample file through your browser or via a web request.Affected if The /ckeditor/samples/ directory is publicly accessible via the web.
You are affected if CKEditor version 4.15.1 or earlier is installed AND the /ckeditor/samples/old/ajax.html file exists and is accessible via the web.
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 CKEditor to a version newer than 4.15.1 when a patched release is available, or remove/restrict access to the /ckeditor/samples/ directory in production environments as a temporary workaround.
Fix this in Ckeditor
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-2023-4771 — 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-2023-4771 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