CVE-2023-37518VulnerabilityPublished 30 Jan 2024Updated 29 May 2025

CVE-2023-37518: HCL Software BigFix ServiceNow Data Flow · Code Injection

Affects HCL Software BigFix ServiceNow Data FlowSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.4 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.4Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 34% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 30 Jan 2024
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 26 Oct 2026.

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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
HCL Software BigFix ServiceNow Data Flow	Affected <=1.2	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Upgrade: Organizations should promptly upgrade BigFix ServiceNow Data Flow to a version beyond 1.2 once a patch or updated release is available from HCL Software. 2. Access Control: Restrict and monitor access to the BigFix ServiceNow Data Flow integration components, ensuring that only trusted and necessary personnel have the required privileges to reduce the risk of authorized attackers exploiting this vulnerability. 3. Input Validation: Implement additional input validation and sanitization controls at the integration points, if possible, to prevent injection of malicious code. 4. Network Segmentation: Isolate the BigFix-ServiceNow integration environment from broader network segments to limit the scope of potential exploitation. 5. Monitoring and Logging: Enhance logging and monitoring around the data flow processes to detect anomalous activities indicative of code injection attempts or unauthorized access. 6. Credential Management: Enforce strong credential policies and consider multi-factor authentication for accounts with access to the vulnerable components. 7. Incident Response Preparedness: Prepare incident response plans specific to this vulnerability, including steps to identify and contain exploitation attempts.

Description

HCL BigFix ServiceNow is vulnerable to arbitrary code injection. A malicious authorized attacker could inject arbitrary code and execute within the context of the running user.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized code execution within critical IT management workflows, as BigFix and ServiceNow are widely used for endpoint management and IT service management respectively. Exploitation could compromise the confidentiality and integrity of sensitive operational data, including incident records, asset inventories, and configuration data. This could disrupt IT operations, lead to data breaches, or facilitate lateral movement within corporate networks. Given the integration nature of the product, attackers might leverage this vulnerability to pivot into other connected systems, increasing the attack surface. The medium severity indicates a significant but not catastrophic risk; however, the requirement for authorized access means that insider threats or compromised credentials are the most likely attack vectors. European organizations with stringent data protection regulations (e.g., GDPR) could face compliance risks if sensitive data is exposed or altered. The vulnerability's impact is particularly relevant for sectors relying heavily on IT service management, such as finance, healthcare, and government agencies.

CWE-94Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #10OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
Architecture and Design · Refactoring
Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
Architecture and Design
Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.2.8 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating User-Controlled Variables (opens in a new tab)
Code Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

support.hcltechsw.com/csm?id=kb_article&sysparm_article=KB0110202 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Jul 2025, 01:10 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-94

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats