CVE-2023-6720
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 · uneditedAn XSS vulnerability stored in Repox has been identified, which allows a local attacker to store a specially crafted JavaScript payload on the server, due to the lack of proper sanitisation of field elements, allowing the attacker to trigger the malicious payload when the application loads.
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 stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in Repox due to insufficient input sanitization. An attacker with local access can inject malicious JavaScript payloads into application field elements, which persist on the server and execute when users load the affected application pages.
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= 2.3.7CVSS 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 installed Repox versionLocate the Europeana Repox installation directory and check the version manifest, configuration file, or application metadata. Common locations include the application root directory, a /version endpoint, or package descriptor files.Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.3.7
-
Confirm Repox service is runningVerify the Repox application is accessible via its web interface or API endpoint. Check if the service is listening on its configured port.Affected if The application is running and accessible to users who would view the injected content
-
Locate user input fieldsExamine the Repox web application for forms, configuration fields, or data entry points where users can submit or store text values. Common areas include data provider configuration, set definitions, or metadata templates.Affected if The application contains user input fields that accept and store text data
-
Test for lack of input sanitizationSubmit a benign test payload containing HTML or script tags (e.g., <script>alert(1)</script> or <img src=x onerror=alert(1)>) into available input fields and observe if the tags are stored and rendered as-is when the page is reloaded.Affected if The submitted payload is stored and executed/stored verbatim without encoding or sanitization when the page is viewed
A user is affected if Europeana Repox version 2.3.7 is installed, the application is accessible, and user-supplied input in application fields is not sanitized before storage and display.
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 proper input validation and output encoding/sanitization for all user-supplied data fields to prevent script injection.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-6720 — 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-2023-6720 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