CVE-2023-33510
Path Traversal in Jeecg P3 Biz Chat Project Jeecg P3 Biz Chat 1.0.5
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2023-33510 is a high-severity Exposure of Resource to Wrong Sphere (CWE-668) vulnerability in Jeecg P3 Biz Chat Project Jeecg P3 Biz Chat. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data Obfuscation (T1001); ranked in the top 10% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
Jeecg P3 Biz Chat version 1.0.5 contains an arbitrary file read vulnerability that can be triggered through specific parameters. The affected component is the Jeecg P3 Biz Chat JAR, which is exposed to network callers and is associated with CWE-22 and CWE-668 weaknesses. The issue received a CVSS 3.1 score of 7.5 reflecting network attack vector, low complexity, and no required authentication or user interaction.
Unauthenticated remote attackers can supply crafted parameters to retrieve arbitrary files from the underlying system, resulting in disclosure of sensitive data with high confidentiality impact while leaving integrity and availability unaffected.
The EPSS score for this CVE currently stands at 0.7148 with a recorded peak of 0.7404. Public references consist of a technical disclosure detailing the parameter-based file read vector in the 1.0.5 release.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-1888
Vulnerability Data
Jeecg P3 Biz Chat 1.0.5 allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files through specific parameters.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.3.2
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.
Controls whether organization resources are exposed to external system spheres by permitting or prohibiting their use.
The control ensures information is not released into a security sphere where the recipient lacks matching access authorizations.
The control ensures information resources are not exposed to the incorrect (public) sphere through review and authorization.
Protects against data mining that would expose resources to unauthorized spheres by enforcing detection and controls.
Restricts information flows to ensure resources are not exposed to incorrect or unauthorized spheres.
Controlling internal connections prevents exposure of resources to unintended internal spheres.
Knowing exact processing and storage locations helps avoid exposure of resources to incorrect spheres.
The control prevents exposure of the media resource to the wrong security sphere.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Patching/maintenance can remediate known path-traversal flaws in deployed software (partial prevention of exploitability) but does nothing to stop the coding defect from being introduced in the first place.
PR.AA-05 defines and reviews access policies but does not address code-level pathname neutralization, so neither direction prevents CWE-22.
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.
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.