Improper Access Control in answerdev/answer
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Plan (action score 41/100)
- Public proof-of-concept code exists (Exploit-DB); there is no record of exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 6.3% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 93.5% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to CISA the attack is automatable: targets can be found by mass scanning.
- Fixed version: github.com/answerdev/answer (Go) 1.0.4.
Add it to your regular patch cycle. Upgrade to github.com/answerdev/answer (Go) 1.0.4 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Improper Access Control in GitHub repository answerdev/answer prior to 1.0.4.
- Published
- Feb 8, 2023
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 6.4% · 94th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-284
Report tools
Action score
41
Plan
Add it to your regular patch cycle.
- CVSS
- 39 / 40 · 9.8 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 2 / 30 · 6.4%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- proof of concept
- Automatable
- yes
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 9.8
- CNA · @huntrdev
- 9.8
- agree
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- Proof of concept exists, no weaponized module
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| answer | answer | cpe:2.3:a:answer:answer |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- answer answerbefore 1.0.4
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (@huntrdev). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
answerdev answerdev/answer
- unspecified and later · before 1.0.4affected
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/answerdev/answer | before 1.0.4 | 1.0.4 |
Same product
answer: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2023-1537Authentication Bypass by Capture-replay in answerdev/answer39Monitor
- CVE-2023-0743Cross-site Scripting (XSS) - Generic in answerdev/answer36Monitor
- CVE-2023-0742Cross-site Scripting (XSS) - Stored in answerdev/answer36Monitor
- CVE-2023-0741Cross-site Scripting (XSS) - DOM in answerdev/answer36Monitor
- CVE-2023-0740Cross-site Scripting (XSS) - Stored in answerdev/answer36Monitor
- CVE-2023-4815Missing Authentication for Critical Function in answerdev/answer35Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Go:github.com/answerdev/answer | 1.0.4 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
Proof of concept available
A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.
Evidence
- Exploit-DB entry ×1
Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.
| Source | Kind | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Exploit-DB entry | webapps | 2023-04-05 |
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
- Published
- First PoC+56 d
- TodayOct 13, 2026+1344 d
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-284 · Improper Access ControlCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Embedding Scripts within ScriptsCAPEC-19likelihood: High · High
- Malicious Logic InsertionCAPEC-441likelihood: Medium · High
- Modification of Windows Service ConfigurationCAPEC-478likelihood: Low · High
- Malicious Root CertificateCAPEC-479likelihood: Low · Low
- Intent SpoofCAPEC-502
- WebView ExposureCAPEC-503
- Data Injected During ConfigurationCAPEC-536likelihood: Low · High
- Incomplete Data Deletion in a Multi-Tenant EnvironmentCAPEC-546likelihood: Low · Medium
ATT&CK techniques
- RootkitT1014
- Obfuscated Files or Information: Embedded PayloadsT1027.009
- Boot or Logon Initialization ScriptsT1037
- Taint shared contentT1080
- Server Software Component: Terminal Services DLLT1505.005
- Pre-OS Boot:BootkitT1542.003
- Create or Modify System ProcessT1543
- Create or Modify System Process: Launch AgentT1543.001
- Create or Modify System Process:Windows ServiceT1543.003
- Create or Modify System Process: Launch DaemonT1543.004
- Event Triggered Execution:Change Default File AssociationT1546.001
- Event Triggered Execution:.bash_profile and .bashrcT1546.004
- Event Triggered Execution: Accessibility FeaturesT1546.008
- Event Triggered Execution: Installer PackagesT1546.016
- Boot or Logon Autostart ExecutionT1547
- Boot or Logon Autostart Execution:Kernel Modules and ExtensionsT1547.006
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (1 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.