VulnerabilityPublished 4 Oct 2023Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2023-4380: Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.4 for RHEL 8 · Sensitive Data in Logs

Affects Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.4 for RHEL 8Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 50% 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:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

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

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: 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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 4 Oct 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 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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately audit existing log files for any sensitive credential exposure and restrict access to log storage locations to authorized personnel only. Implement strict access controls and monitoring on log management systems to detect unauthorized access attempts. Until a patch is released by Red Hat, consider disabling or limiting private project creation functionality or using alternative credential management methods that do not log sensitive data. Employ log redaction or filtering tools to sanitize logs proactively. Regularly update and patch the Ansible Automation Platform as vendor fixes become available. Additionally, enforce the principle of least privilege for users interacting with the platform to minimize the risk of exploitation. Conduct security awareness training for administrators to recognize and report suspicious log entries or behavior. Finally, integrate anomaly detection systems to identify unusual access patterns to logs or automation projects.

Description

A logic flaw exists in Ansible Automation platform. Whenever a private project is created with incorrect credentials, they are logged in plaintext. This flaw allows an attacker to retrieve the credentials from the log, resulting in the loss of confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

Impact

For European organizations, the exposure of plaintext credentials in logs can lead to unauthorized access to automation projects and potentially broader infrastructure if those credentials are reused or provide elevated privileges. This can result in data breaches, unauthorized configuration changes, and disruption of automated workflows, impacting business continuity. Given Ansible's role in managing critical infrastructure and applications, exploitation could cascade into service outages or compromise of sensitive data. The integrity of audit logs is also at risk, hindering forensic investigations and compliance efforts. Organizations in sectors with stringent regulatory requirements, such as finance, healthcare, and government, face heightened risks of non-compliance and reputational damage. The medium severity suggests that while exploitation is feasible, it requires some level of access and knowledge, limiting widespread immediate impact but still demanding timely remediation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Nov 2025, 18:41 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats