Security Resilience

CVE-2023-48311

Jupyter Dockerspawner 0.11.0 – 13.0

Published
08 December 2023
Modified
21 November 2024
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 8.0
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0064 49th percentile
Risk Priority 59 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2023-48311 is a high-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Jupyter Dockerspawner. Its CVSS base score is 8.0 (High).

Operationally, ranked at the 49th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

dockerspawner is a tool to spawn JupyterHub single user servers in Docker containers. Users of JupyterHub deployments running DockerSpawner starting with 0.11.0 without specifying `DockerSpawner.allowed_images` configuration allow users to launch _any_ pullable docker image, instead of restricting to only the…

more

single configured image, as intended. This issue has been addressed in commit `3ba4b665b` which has been included in dockerspawner release version 13. Users are advised to upgrade. Users unable to upgrade should explicitly set `DockerSpawner.allowed_images` to a non-empty list containing only the default image will result in the intended default behavior.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-44180Same vendor: Jupyter
CVE-2026-33175Same vendor: Jupyter
CVE-2026-54528Same vendor: Jupyter
CVE-2026-34052Same vendor: Jupyter
CVE-2026-44727Same vendor: Jupyter
CVE-2026-40864Same vendor: Jupyter
CVE-2026-42266Same vendor: Jupyter
CVE-2023-49080Same vendor: Jupyter
CVE-2024-41942Same vendor: Jupyter
CVE-2026-42557Same vendor: Jupyter

Affected Assets

jupyter
dockerspawner
0.11.0 — 13.0

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.

addresses: CWE-20

Security testing and developer training directly verify and enforce proper input validation, reducing exploitability of injection and malformed-data weaknesses.

addresses: CWE-20

Security testing and evaluation at multiple SDLC stages directly detects missing or flawed input validation, with the required remediation process ensuring fixes are applied.

addresses: CWE-20

Directly implements checks on information inputs to reject invalid data before processing.

addresses: CWE-20

Spam protection mechanisms perform filtering and detection on inbound/outbound messages, directly compensating for missing or weak input validation of unsolicited content.

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.

blocks

A.8.25 mandates security requirements, secure coding guidelines, checkpoints, testing (incl. code scans) and developer training in the SDLC, which reaches a slice of input validation defects but leaves the majority (incomplete enforcement, second-order inputs, parser differentials, post-validation canonicalization) unaddressed as in the SA-3 and A.8.28 anchors.

blocks

Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.

blocks

Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.

prevents

Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.

finds

Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.

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.

  • No fine-grained STIG row for CWE-20, a class-level weakness, and none of its children carries one either.

References