CVE-2023-31062
Apache Inlong 1.2.0 – 1.6.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2023-31062 is a critical-severity Improper Privilege Management (CWE-269) vulnerability in Apache Inlong. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, ranked in the top 30% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2023-31062 is an improper privilege management vulnerability affecting Apache InLong versions 1.2.0 through 1.6.0. The flaw resides in the component's handling of authenticated sessions and allows an authenticated but unprivileged user to perform actions beyond their assigned permissions.
An attacker with a valid low-privileged account can exploit the issue by capturing the session cookie returned from a login request and replaying it in a subsequent HTTP request crafted with Burp Suite, thereby bypassing intended access controls and potentially achieving full compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
Apache advisories recommend upgrading to InLong 1.7.0 or applying the fix from pull request 7836 to resolve the privilege-management gap.
The EPSS score rose materially from a low baseline to a peak of 0.0800 on 2025-01-22 before receding, indicating that exploitation interest increased after disclosure and that the CVE merits renewed attention.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-2125
Vulnerability Data
Improper Privilege Management Vulnerabilities in Apache Software Foundation Apache InLong.This issue affects Apache InLong: from 1.2.0 through 1.6.0. When the attacker has access to a valid (but unprivileged) account, the exploit can be executed using Burp Suite by sending a…
more
login request and following it with a subsequent HTTP request using the returned cookie. Users are advised to upgrade to Apache InLong's 1.7.0 or cherry-pick https://github.com/apache/inlong/pull/7836 https://github.com/apache/inlong/pull/7836 to solve it.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Policy addresses roles, responsibilities, and privilege management to prevent improper privilege assignments.
Access supervision ensures privileges are assigned and managed without improper escalation or retention.
Assigning group/role memberships and access authorizations (privileges) while reviewing accounts addresses improper privilege management.
Enforces proper privilege management by requiring all decisions through the verified reference monitor.
By mandating division of duties across roles, the control enforces proper privilege management and prevents a single entity from controlling an entire sensitive process.
Implements core proper privilege management by restricting to only required rights.
Policy requires training on privilege management and least privilege, making it harder to exploit improper privilege management weaknesses.
Training covers proper privilege management practices, making incorrect privilege assignments less likely.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
A.5.15 directly mandates determining access requirements, defining/enforcing topic-specific access control policy, assigning rights/restrictions by entity/role, consistency with classification, need-to-know, privileged access restrictions, segregation, formal authorization, and dynamic rules — which stops most improper privilege management from being exploitable; bounded remainder is flawed implementation of those rules (e.g. incorrect mapping or enforcement bugs).
A.5.18 directly governs the provisioning, review, modification and timely revocation of access rights (including for role changes, termination and privilege levels), which stops most improper privilege spheres from being exploitable even if the assignment flaw exists; the bounded remainder is flaws in the underlying enforcement mechanism itself (e.g. AC-3/A.8.3)
Defining and communicating authorization levels for each role limits the assignment of excessive or unnecessary privileges.
Logging every use of privileges and protecting those records makes it harder for an attacker who has obtained elevated rights to operate without leaving evidence.
A.8.2 directly controls the identification, allocation, review, expiry, temporary use, and separation of privileged rights per policy, which prevents most improper privilege management (CWE-269) by design; the bounded remainder is flawed tracking/checking logic inside the product's own enforcement code (the AC-3 slice of 269).
A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles including least privilege, default deny, fail securely, defence in depth, security architecture integration, hardening, and zero-trust verification of every request; these directly stop most improper privilege spheres from being exploitable even if the assignment flaw remains, with a bounded remainder (e.g. certain legacy or safety-overridden controls).
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.