CVE-2023-4893
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 · uneditedThe Crayon Syntax Highlighter plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Server Side Request Forgery via the 'crayon' shortcode in versions up to, and including, 2.8.4. This can allow authenticated attackers with contributor-level permissions or above to make web requests to arbitrary locations originating from the web application and can be used to query and modify information from internal services.
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 Crayon Syntax Highlighter WordPress plugin versions up to 2.8.4 contains a Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in its 'crayon' shortcode. Authenticated users with contributor-level permissions or higher can abuse this to make arbitrary web requests from the server, potentially reaching internal services and exfiltrating data.
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<= 2.8.4CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/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.
-
Check if Crayon Syntax Highlighter is installedNavigate to WordPress Admin > Plugins and look for 'Crayon Syntax Highlighter' in the installed plugins list. Note the version number displayed.Affected if The plugin is present and the version shown is 2.8.4 or lower.
-
Verify the shortcode is accessibleCheck if the WordPress shortcode [crayon] is registered by viewing the plugin files (typically in wp-content/plugins/crayon-syntax-highlighter/) or by testing the shortcode on a test post/page.Affected if The [crayon] shortcode is registered and functional in the environment.
-
Identify users with contributor-level accessGo to WordPress Admin > Users and review the role assigned to each user. Look for any users with 'Contributor', 'Author', 'Editor', or 'Administrator' roles.Affected if At least one user account has contributor-level permissions or higher.
-
Confirm the shortcode accepts URL parametersTest the shortcode with a URL parameter, for example: [crayon url='http://example.com/']. Check if the plugin attempts to fetch the URL server-side.Affected if The shortcode processes external URLs and makes server-side requests.
If the Crayon Syntax Highlighter plugin version is 2.8.4 or lower AND contributor-level or higher user accounts exist in WordPress, the environment is vulnerable to SSRF via the crayon shortcode.
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 dataUpdate the Crayon Syntax Highlighter plugin to the latest version if available; otherwise, disable the plugin. Review and restrict contributor-level user permissions pending a patch.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-4893 — 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-2023-4893 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