Cyber Resilience

CVE-2023-51446

Glpi-Project Glpi 0.70 – 10.0.12

Published
01 February 2024
Modified
21 November 2024
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 5.9
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0087 56th percentile
Risk Priority 48 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2023-51446 is a medium-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Glpi-Project Glpi. Its CVSS base score is 5.9 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 44% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

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.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

GLPI is a Free Asset and IT Management Software package. When authentication is made against a LDAP, the authentication form can be used to perform LDAP injection. Upgrade to 10.0.12.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

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.
T1221 Template Injection Stealth
Adversaries may create or modify references in user document templates to conceal malicious code or force authentication attempts.
T1659 Content Injection Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access and continuously communicate with victims by injecting malicious content into systems through online network traffic.
T1674 Input Injection Execution
Adversaries may simulate keystrokes on a victim’s computer by various means to perform any type of action on behalf of the user, such as launching the command interpreter using keyboard shortcuts, typing an inline script to be executed,…
T1059 Command and Scripting Interpreter Execution
Adversaries may abuse command and script interpreters to execute commands, scripts, or binaries.
T1059.001 PowerShell Execution
Adversaries may abuse PowerShell commands and scripts for execution.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-46726Same product: Glpi-Project Glpi
CVE-2022-35914Same product: Glpi-Project Glpi
CVE-2023-28853Shared CWE-74, CWE-90
CVE-2023-31025Shared CWE-74, CWE-90
CVE-2023-29050Shared CWE-74, CWE-90
CVE-2023-23749Shared CWE-74
CVE-2023-48835Shared CWE-74
CVE-2023-51939Shared CWE-74
CVE-2023-33242Shared CWE-74
CVE-2023-4157Shared CWE-74

Affected Assets

glpi-project
glpi
0.70 — 10.0.12

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)
  • V1.2.1
  • V1.2.3
  • V1.2.5
  • V1.2.8

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation can discover LDAP injection flaws through static analysis or crafted test cases.

SI-10 directly requires validation of information inputs to reject malformed or special-element content before it reaches downstream parsers.

Secure engineering principles require safe query construction and escaping that structurally prevents LDAP injection.

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 require input validation and output encoding that prevent injection flaws.

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

Security testing in development catches injection vulnerabilities before release.

A.8.15 Logging partial match
finds

Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.

finds

Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent injection flaws.

prevents

Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection attacks in software design.

prevents

Secure architecture principles reduce injection surfaces but do not prescribe specific neutralization techniques.

References