CVE-2023-32668VulnerabilityPublished 11 May 2023Updated 3 Nov 2025

CVE-2023-32668: luatex · n/a

Affects luatexSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.5 Medium : upgrade to 1.17.0 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.5Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 30% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.17.0

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 11 May 2023
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade texlive/luatex to 1.17.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubtexlive/luatex`pkg:github/texlive/luatex`Other threats	Affected <1.17.0	Fixed in 1.17.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

1. Upgrade LuaTeX to version 1.17.0 or later, and update TeX Live to 2023 r66984 or newer, and MiKTeX to version 23.5 or later to apply official patches that restrict socket library access. 2. Configure LuaTeX and related TeX engines to disable or sandbox network capabilities where possible, especially in automated or multi-user environments. 3. Implement strict document handling policies to verify the source and integrity of TeX documents before processing. 4. Use network-level controls such as firewall rules or application-layer proxies to restrict outbound connections from systems used for document compilation. 5. Educate users about the risks of opening untrusted TeX documents and encourage scanning or sandboxing before processing. 6. Monitor network traffic from document processing systems for unusual outbound connections that could indicate exploitation attempts.

Description

LuaTeX before 1.17.0 allows a document (compiled with the default settings) to make arbitrary network requests. This occurs because full access to the socket library is permitted by default, as stated in the documentation. This also affects TeX Live before 2023 r66984 and MiKTeX before 23.5.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized data exfiltration or network reconnaissance if malicious TeX documents are processed in vulnerable environments. Academic institutions, research centers, and publishing houses that frequently use LuaTeX or TeX Live/MiKTeX distributions are particularly at risk. Confidential information embedded in documents or accessible during compilation could be leaked. Although the vulnerability does not directly compromise system integrity or availability, the ability to make arbitrary network requests can facilitate further attacks such as command and control communication or data leakage. The requirement for user interaction (opening or compiling a malicious document) limits large-scale automated exploitation but does not eliminate targeted attacks. Organizations relying on automated document processing pipelines should be cautious, as these could be abused to trigger the vulnerability without direct user action.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…