Epolicy OrchestratorApplication · Mcafee

CVE-2023-5444

HIGH · 8.0 CVSS v3.1 Published 2023-11-17
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 5.10.0 or later.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable

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
A Cross Site Request Forgery vulnerability in ePolicy Orchestrator prior to 5.10.0 CP1 Update 2 allows a remote low privilege user to successfully add a new user with administrator privileges to the ePO server. This impacts the dashboard area of the user interface. To exploit this the attacker must change the HTTP payload post submission, prior to it reaching the ePO server.

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

A CSRF vulnerability in McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator prior to version 5.10.0 CP1 Update 2 allows an authenticated low-privilege user to trick an administrator into unknowingly creating a new user with administrator privileges by manipulating the HTTP payload during form submission to the dashboard area.

MitigationUpdate ePolicy Orchestrator to version 5.10.0 CP1 Update 2 or later, which includes proper CSRF token validation for administrative actions.

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
Epolicy OrchestratorApplication
Affected:< 5.10.0= 5.10.0

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
Low
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/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 checks

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

  1. Determine ePolicy Orchestrator version
    Check the installed ePolicy Orchestrator version in the product console or system information, typically accessible from the dashboard or 'About' section in the ePO console
    Affected if Version displayed is < 5.10.0 or equals exactly 5.10.0
  2. Confirm version is vulnerable
    Compare your installed version number against the affected range: any version prior to 5.10.0, or version 5.10.0 exactly, is within the vulnerable range
    Affected if Installed version is 5.10.0 or any earlier release (e.g., 5.10.0, 5.9.x, 5.8.x, etc.)
  3. Verify patch level if on 5.10.0
    If running 5.10.0 specifically, check whether the CP1 Update 2 patch has been applied - this patch adds proper CSRF token validation
    Affected if Running 5.10.0 without CP1 Update 2 applied (the fix is only in 5.10.0 CP1 Update 2 or later)

Your environment is affected if ePolicy Orchestrator is any version below 5.10.0 CP1 Update 2, including version 5.10.0 without the CP1 Update 2 patch applied.

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
Upgrade available Upgrade to 5.10.0 or later
Fixed in 5.10.0
Interim mitigation

Update ePolicy Orchestrator to version 5.10.0 CP1 Update 2 or later, which includes proper CSRF token validation for administrative actions.

Recommended fix Moderate confidence

ePolicy Orchestrator 5.10.0 CP1 Update 2

  1. 1. Back up the ePolicy Orchestrator database and configuration files before proceeding with any upgrade.
  2. 2. Review release notes for ePolicy Orchestrator 5.10.0 CP1 Update 2 to understand any prerequisites or special considerations.
  3. 3. Download ePolicy Orchestrator 5.10.0 CP1 Update 2 from the Trellix download portal or your authorized distribution channel.
  4. 4. Stop all ePO services on the server before applying the update.
  5. 5. Run the installer or update package for 5.10.0 CP1 Update 2, following the on-screen instructions.
  6. 6. After installation, verify that all ePO services start successfully.
  7. 7. Log in to the ePO console and verify that the new user with administrator privileges cannot be added via CSRF attack.
  8. 8. Confirm that all expected functionality works correctly in the dashboard area.

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

Fix this in Epolicy Orchestrator Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-5444 — 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-2023-5444 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