VulnerabilityPublished 2 Feb 2024Updated 3 Jun 2025

CVE-2023-37531: HCL Software BigFix Platform · Cross-site Scripting

Affects HCL Software BigFix PlatformSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.3 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:08 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.3Low

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 29% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
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: 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 2 Feb 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 Platform	Affected >=9.5 <=9.5.23 >=10 <=10.0.10	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Restrict privileged access strictly to trusted personnel and enforce strong authentication mechanisms such as multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of credential compromise. 2. Implement rigorous input validation and sanitization on all form fields within the Web Reports component to prevent injection of malicious scripts. 3. Monitor and audit privileged user activities within BigFix to detect anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. 4. Apply the latest security updates and patches from HCL as soon as they become available; in the absence of official patches, consider temporary workarounds such as disabling or limiting access to the Web Reports component for non-essential users. 5. Conduct regular security training for administrators and privileged users to recognize phishing and social engineering attempts that could lead to credential theft. 6. Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious script injection attempts targeting the BigFix Web Reports interface. 7. Review and harden network segmentation to limit exposure of the BigFix platform to only necessary internal networks and trusted endpoints.

Description

A cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Web Reports component of HCL BigFix Platform can possibly allow an attacker to execute malicious javascript code into a form field of a webpage by a user with privileged access.

Impact

For European organizations using HCL BigFix Platform versions 9.5 to 10.0.10, this vulnerability poses a limited but non-negligible risk. Since exploitation requires privileged access, the threat is mainly internal or from attackers who have already compromised high-level credentials. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized script execution within the Web Reports interface, potentially allowing attackers to manipulate reporting data, exfiltrate sensitive information, or perform actions with elevated privileges. This could undermine the integrity of endpoint management and security operations managed through BigFix. Given the critical role BigFix plays in patch management, compliance, and endpoint security, any compromise could disrupt security monitoring and response capabilities. However, the low CVSS score and absence of known exploits suggest the immediate risk is low. Still, organizations should not ignore this vulnerability, especially those in regulated sectors such as finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure within Europe, where data integrity and security compliance are paramount.

CWE-79Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #1OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch (opens in a new tab)
DOM-Based XSS (opens in a new tab)
Reflected XSS (opens in a new tab)
Stored XSS (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (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=KB0110209 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Jul 2025, 13:40 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats