CVE-2023-51728
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 · uneditedThis vulnerability exist in Skyworth Router CM5100, version 4.1.1.24, due to insufficient validation of user supplied input for the SMTP Password parameter at its web interface. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability by supplying specially crafted input to the parameter at the web interface of the vulnerable targeted system. Successful exploitation of this vulnerability could allow the attacker to perform stored XSS attacks on the targeted system.
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 confidenceA stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the Skyworth Router CM5100 version 4.1.1.24 web interface. The vulnerability stems from insufficient validation of user-supplied input in the SMTP Password parameter, allowing remote attackers to inject malicious scripts that persist on the targeted system.
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= 4.1.1.24CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 device model and firmware versionAccess the router web interface and navigate to the Status or System Info page to view the device model and firmware version. Alternatively, check via CLI or look for version information on the device label.Affected if The device is a Skyworth CM5100 running firmware version 4.1.1.24
-
Confirm SMTP feature is accessibleLog into the router web interface and navigate to the email/SMTP configuration section, typically found under Advanced Settings or Network Settings.Affected if The SMTP configuration page is accessible and accepts input for the SMTP Password field
-
Check SMTP password field for persistenceEnter a benign test string (such as a unique marker) into the SMTP Password field and save the configuration. Then navigate away and return to the page to see if the value persists and is rendered as entered.Affected if The password field accepts and stores input without proper sanitization, indicating potential XSS vulnerability in that parameter
You are affected if you are running Skyworth CM5100 firmware version 4.1.1.24 and have access to the SMTP configuration feature in the web interface where the password parameter accepts user-supplied input.
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 dataImplement rigorous input validation and output encoding on the SMTP Password parameter to sanitize user-supplied data before rendering or storage. Additionally, apply the latest firmware update from the vendor and restrict administrative web interface access to trusted networks.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-51728 — 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-2023-51728 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