Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:NSummary
CVE-2023-6184 is a medium-severity Improper Control of Dynamically-Managed Code Resources (CWE-913) vulnerability in Citrix Virtual Apps And Desktops. Its CVSS base score is 5.0 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Browser Session Hijacking (T1185); ranked in the top 1% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — 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.
Citrix Session Recording contains a cross-site scripting vulnerability tracked as CVE-2023-6184 and assigned CWE-79 and CWE-913. The flaw permits an attacker to inject and execute arbitrary scripts within the application, as reflected in its CVSS 3.1 score of 5.0 with the vector AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N.
An attacker who already possesses administrative credentials and can reach the Session Recording interface over the network may leverage the issue to obtain elevated confidentiality access and limited integrity impact. Exploitation requires high attack complexity and does not rely on user interaction.
The official Citrix security bulletin CTX583930 addresses the vulnerability and supplies remediation guidance for affected Session Recording deployments.
EPSS for the CVE rose from a low baseline to a peak of 0.3123 on 2025-12-11 before receding to the current value of 0.2080, indicating measurable post-disclosure exploitation interest that later subsided.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-58433
Vulnerability Data
Cross SiteScripting vulnerability in Citrix Session Recording allows attacker to perform Cross Site Scripting
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 2 hardening rules · 2 OS baselines
V1.1.2V1.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Access enforcement directly stops unauthorized reads/writes to dynamic code resources by applying authorization checks at access time.
Least privilege reduces the set of subjects that can reach or modify dynamic code resources, limiting the weakness's reach.
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.
Isolating security functions from non-security code prevents unintended manipulation of dynamically managed executable resources.
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 explicitly include controls that prevent improper handling of dynamic code resources.
Blocking unauthorized code execution directly limits the ability to abuse dynamically-managed resources.
Runtime-environment monitoring can detect exploitation of the weakness but does not prevent it.
Vulnerability identification can surface instances of CWE-913 but does not mitigate the root weakness.
Hardened configuration baselines can restrict dynamic code execution and variable access at runtime.
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 can detect dynamic code weaknesses but does not prevent them at design or coding time.
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.
Secure development lifecycle mandates controls on dynamic code generation and resource management.
Application security requirements explicitly address restrictions on dynamic code execution and resource access.
Secure architecture principles require design controls that prevent improper dynamic code resource manipulation.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Windows 10 (1 rule)
- V-220726 Data Execution Prevention (DEP) must be configured to at least OptOut. prevents CWE-913
Windows 11 (1 rule)
- V-253283 Data Execution Prevention (DEP) must be configured to at least OptOut. prevents CWE-913