Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:LSummary
CVE-2023-47119 is a medium-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Discourse Discourse. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Browser Session Hijacking (T1185); ranked in the top 42% 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.
Discourse is an open source discussion platform whose Onebox link-rendering engine is affected by CVE-2023-47119. Prior to versions 3.1.3 (stable) and 3.2.0.beta3 (beta and tests-passed), specially crafted links could cause arbitrary HTML tags to be injected during rendering. The flaw is tracked under CWE-74 and CWE-79 and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 5.3 reflecting network attackability with low complexity and no authentication or user interaction required, resulting in limited availability impact.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can supply a malicious link that is processed by the Onebox engine, allowing HTML injection that may degrade service availability for users viewing the affected post. No confidentiality or integrity impact is indicated by the CVSS vector.
The official GitHub Security Advisory and accompanying commits state that the issue is resolved in the cited releases and that no workarounds are known; administrators are therefore advised to upgrade promptly. The associated EPSS score has remained flat at 0.1424 with no material increase since disclosure.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-51262
Vulnerability Data
Discourse is an open source platform for community discussion. Prior to version 3.1.3 of the `stable` branch and version 3.2.0.beta3 of the `beta` and `tests-passed` branches, some links can inject arbitrary HTML tags when rendered through our Onebox engine. The…
more
issue is patched in version 3.1.3 of the `stable` branch and version 3.2.0.beta3 of the `beta` and `tests-passed` branches. There are no known workarounds.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.1V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8
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.
Penetration testing submits XSS payloads to web applications, detecting cross-site scripting flaws for subsequent remediation.
Developer assessments and testing (including injection-focused techniques) identify improper neutralization of special elements, and the verifiable flaw remediation corrects them pre-deployment.
Validates web inputs to reject script-related content that could produce XSS.
Output validation against expected content can reject or sanitize script content in generated web pages, reducing XSS exploitability.
Identifies indicators of injection attacks (command, SQL, LDAP, etc.) via anomaly and attack monitoring.
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 SDLC practices directly require input validation and output encoding that prevent injection flaws.
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.
Security testing in development catches injection vulnerabilities before release.
Knowledge exchange on emerging attack techniques and patches reduces the likelihood that cross-site scripting flaws remain unaddressed in deployed applications.
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.
Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent injection flaws.