Cyber Resilience

CVE-2023-47115

XSS in Humansignal Label Studio ≤ 1.9.2

Public PoCXSS
Published
23 January 2024
Modified
21 November 2024
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
EPSS Score 0.014 71th percentile
Risk Priority 67 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2023-47115 is a high-severity Cross-site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Humansignal Label Studio. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Browser Session Hijacking (T1185); ranked in the top 29% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as Other AI Platforms; in the Other ATLAS/OWASP Terms risk domain.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary

Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.

Label Studio versions prior to 1.9.2 contain a cross-site scripting vulnerability in the avatar upload functionality. The affected code in users/functions.py performs only a client-side image dimension check before storing the file, after which Django's built-in serve view delivers the content using the file extension from the URL to set the Content-Type header. An attacker can therefore supply a file containing HTML and JavaScript that is rendered directly in a victim's browser.

An authenticated user can upload a maliciously named avatar image that bypasses the client-side filter. When another user, particularly a Django administrator, views the avatar, the embedded script executes with the victim's privileges, enabling actions such as creation of a new superuser account.

The GitHub Security Advisory and the 1.9.2 patch recommend upgrading to the fixed release. Additional hardening steps include performing server-side file-extension validation, replacing Django's serve view with a dedicated controller that enforces safe Content-Type handling, and storing avatar content in the database rather than the filesystem.

The EPSS score rose from a low baseline to a peak of 0.27 on 2025-01-22 before receding, indicating a period of increased exploitation interest after public disclosure.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Label Studio is an a popular open source data labeling tool. Versions prior to 1.9.2 have a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be exploited when an authenticated user uploads a crafted image file for their avatar that gets rendered…

more

as a HTML file on the website. Executing arbitrary JavaScript could result in an attacker performing malicious actions on Label Studio users if they visit the crafted avatar image. For an example, an attacker can craft a JavaScript payload that adds a new Django Super Administrator user if a Django administrator visits the image. The file `users/functions.py` lines 18-49 show that the only verification check is that the file is an image by extracting the dimensions from the file. Label Studio serves avatar images using Django's built-in `serve` view, which is not secure for production use according to Django's documentation. The issue with the Django `serve` view is that it determines the `Content-Type` of the response by the file extension in the URL path. Therefore, an attacker can upload an image that contains malicious HTML code and name the file with a `.html` extension to be rendered as a HTML page. The only file extension validation is performed on the client-side, which can be easily bypassed. Version 1.9.2 fixes this issue. Other remediation strategies include validating the file extension on the server side, not in client-side code; removing the use of Django's `serve` view and implement a secure controller for viewing uploaded avatar images; saving file content in the database rather than on the filesystem to mitigate against other file related vulnerabilities; and avoiding trusting user controlled inputs.

CWE(s)

AI Security AnalysisAI

AI Category
Other AI Platforms
Risk Domain
Other ATLAS/OWASP Terms
OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
None mapped
Classification Reason
Label Studio is an open-source data labeling platform used in AI/ML workflows for annotating datasets, fitting under 'Other Platforms' as it supports data preparation for various AI tasks like computer vision and NLP.

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1185 Browser Session Hijacking Collection
Adversaries may take advantage of security vulnerabilities and inherent functionality in browser software to change content, modify user-behaviors, and intercept information as part of various browser session hijacking techniques.
T1539 Steal Web Session Cookie Credential Access
An adversary may steal web application or service session cookies and use them to gain access to web applications or Internet services as an authenticated user without needing credentials.
T1659 Content Injection Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access and continuously communicate with victims by injecting malicious content into systems through online network traffic.
T1189 Drive-by Compromise Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access to a system through a user visiting a website over the normal course of browsing.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-6568Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-46492Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-3685Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-6778Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-25837Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-22438Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-27614Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-47164Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-49145Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-47853Shared CWE-79

Affected Assets

humansignal
label studio
≤ 1.9.2

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.1.2
  • V1.3.2

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect input neutralization through targeted web-application tests.

Input validation directly enforces neutralization of untrusted data before it reaches web output generation.

Output filtering can catch or sanitize unneutralized script content before it is served to users.

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly target introduction of XSS via coding standards/testing (mostly), yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors unaddressed (partial).

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Patching and EOL replacement can remediate known XSS instances in libraries or frameworks (partial) but do nothing to enforce input neutralization in application code (none).

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.

finds

Secure-coding testing and automated code-analysis tools are applied to detect improper neutralization of script-related content during web-page generation.

prevents

Knowledge exchange on emerging attack techniques and patches reduces the likelihood that cross-site scripting flaws remain unaddressed in deployed applications.

prevents

Operational indicators of compromise for web-application attacks can be incorporated into WAF or input-filtering rules, lowering the likelihood that unsanitized data reaches the browser.

prevents

Requiring language-specific secure-coding standards and automated scanning during the SDLC catches missing output encoding or improper neutralization of untrusted data before the software reaches production.

prevents

Secure-coding standards, SAST scans and removal of insecure code samples together eliminate the failure to neutralize script content that produces cross-site scripting flaws.

none

Webpage malware scanning and block-listing of known malicious sites reduce the likelihood that reflected or stored script payloads reach a user’s browser.

References