SeatunnelApplication · Apache

CVE-2023-48396

CRITICAL · 9.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-07-30
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
Web Authentication vulnerability in Apache SeaTunnel. Since the jwt key is hardcoded in the application, an attacker can forge any token to log in any user. Attacker can get secret key in /seatunnel-server/seatunnel-app/src/main/resources/application.yml and then create a token. This issue affects Apache SeaTunnel: 1.0.0. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 1.0.1, which fixes the issue.

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 confidence

Apache SeaTunnel 1.0.0 uses a hardcoded JWT secret key stored in the application.yml configuration file. An attacker who obtains this key can forge authentication tokens and impersonate any user, gaining unauthorized access to the system.

MitigationUpgrade to Apache SeaTunnel 1.0.1 which replaces the hardcoded key with a dynamically generated or externalized secret. Additionally, invalidate and rotate all existing tokens after the upgrade.

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
SeatunnelApplication
Affected:= 1.0.0

CVSS 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
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed SeaTunnel version
    Check the SeaTunnel installation directory for version information, typically found in a version file, pom.xml, or release notes. If running via package manager, use: seatunnel --version or check the JAR manifest.
    Affected if Version is exactly 1.0.0
  2. Locate the application.yml configuration file
    Find the application.yml file in the SeaTunnel configuration directory. Common paths include: config/application.yml, conf/application.yml, or in the classpath under resources/.
    Affected if The application.yml file exists and contains JWT-related configuration
  3. Check if web authentication module is enabled
    In application.yml, look for sections under seatunnel:web or similar web-related configuration. Check for authentication settings or security configurations.
    Affected if Web authentication module is enabled and configured in application.yml
  4. Inspect JWT secret key configuration
    In application.yml, locate the jwt:secret or security:jwt:secret configuration key. Examine whether a static, hardcoded string value is present rather than an empty/null value or environment variable reference.
    Affected if A non-empty, static string value is configured for the JWT secret (e.g., jwt: secret: "a-long-static-string")

You are affected if running SeaTunnel version 1.0.0 with web authentication enabled and a hardcoded JWT secret string exists in application.yml.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade to Apache SeaTunnel 1.0.1 which replaces the hardcoded key with a dynamically generated or externalized secret. Additionally, invalidate and rotate all existing tokens after the upgrade.

Recommended fix High confidence

1.0.1

  1. Upgrade Apache SeaTunnel from version 1.0.0 to version 1.0.1 to obtain the fixed JWT key implementation

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Seatunnel Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,770
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,832.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-48396 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-48396 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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