CVE-2023-36468
Xwiki 2.0 – 14.10.7
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2023-36468 is a critical-severity Incomplete Cleanup (CWE-459) vulnerability in Xwiki Xwiki. Its CVSS base score is 9.9 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data from Local System (T1005); ranked in the top 23% 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.
XWiki Platform is affected by an incomplete remediation issue in which upgrades only append new document versions without invalidating prior revisions that contained security flaws. This allows legacy script content, such as that fixed for CVE-2022-36100, to remain executable when an attacker supplies an explicit revision parameter such as rev=1.1. The problem impacts any XWiki instance upgraded from a pre-fix release and extends to manually created script macros whose vulnerable history was never purged; fresh installations and content loaded exclusively from the current document version are unaffected. The resulting exposure carries a CVSS score of 9.9 and can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the entire installation.
An attacker possessing only view rights can reproduce the original attack steps against an old revision, achieving remote code execution and full system compromise. The same vector applies to any custom script macros that once contained exploitable code, making the flaw easy to overlook during routine upgrades.
Advisories recommend upgrading to XWiki 14.10.7 or 15.2RC1, which force execution of historical revisions in restricted mode that disables script macros. As a workaround, administrators may delete the revision history of all installed documents, either manually or via a provided identification script, though this does not address every manually introduced macro.
EPSS scores have remained near 0.09–0.11 with no pronounced post-disclosure surge.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-1751
Vulnerability Data
XWiki Platform is a generic wiki platform offering runtime services for applications built on top of it. When an XWiki installation is upgraded and that upgrade contains a fix for a bug in a document, just a new version of…
more
that document is added. In some cases, it's still possible to exploit the vulnerability that was fixed in the new version. The severity of this depends on the fixed vulnerability, for the purpose of this advisory take CVE-2022-36100/GHSA-2g5c-228j-p52x as example - it is easily exploitable with just view rights and critical. When XWiki is upgraded from a version before the fix for it (e.g., 14.3) to a version including the fix (e.g., 14.4), the vulnerability can still be reproduced by adding `rev=1.1` to the URL used in the reproduction steps so remote code execution is possible even after upgrading. Therefore, this affects the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the whole XWiki installation. This vulnerability also affects manually added script macros that contained security vulnerabilities that were later fixed by changing the script macro without deleting the versions with the security vulnerability from the history. This vulnerability doesn't affect freshly installed versions of XWiki. Further, this vulnerability doesn't affect content that is only loaded from the current version of a document like the code of wiki macros or UI extensions. This vulnerability has been patched in XWiki 14.10.7 and 15.2RC1 by forcing old revisions to be executed in a restricted mode that disables all script macros. As a workaround, admins can manually delete old revisions of affected documents. A script could be used to identify all installed documents and delete the history for them. However, also manually added and later corrected code may be affected by this vulnerability so it is easy to miss documents.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.4.1
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.
Mandates complete sanitization during cleanup so that shared resources (memory, caches, buffers) do not retain data across subjects.
Operational retention schedules mandate complete cleanup of temporary or residual sensitive data after use.
Termination of the non-persistent artifact guarantees cleanup of temporary state, directly countering incomplete cleanup weaknesses.
Fail-safe procedures can explicitly require cleanup of temporary state, resources, or privileges on failure to avoid leaving the system in an inconsistent state.
The explicit delete step when information is no longer needed implements the cleanup that this weakness omits.
Enforces complete cleanup and sanitization steps during disposal, closing gaps that leave data remnants on retired components.
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.
Secure-development practices and coding standards normally require proper resource release and cleanup.
Life-cycle management encompasses disposal of temporary resources but does not specifically target runtime cleanup bugs.
Explicitly calls for removing sensitive data after use, directly addressing one class of incomplete cleanup.
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.
Explicitly requires secure deletion of temporary or residual data, directly addressing incomplete cleanup.
SDLC practices include cleanup steps, yet the weakness can still occur if those steps are omitted.
Secure-coding rules can mandate explicit cleanup of temporary resources, but do not guarantee it.
Change-management processes may require cleanup verification, but the control itself does not address the weakness.