CVE-2023-5189VulnerabilityPublished 14 Nov 2023Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2023-5189: Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.4 for RHEL 8 · Relative Path Traversal

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, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 62% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: High
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: 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: 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: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 14 Nov 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

AI-suggested

1. Apply official patches or updates from Red Hat as soon as they are released to address CVE-2023-5189. 2. Restrict filesystem permissions on directories used by the galaxy importer to prevent unauthorized write or symlink creation. 3. Implement strict validation and sanitization of tarball contents before extraction, including rejecting tarballs with suspicious or absolute paths and symbolic links. 4. Limit user privileges required to import content into Ansible Automation Hub to trusted administrators only. 5. Monitor logs and file integrity of directories involved in automation workflows for unexpected changes or symlink creations. 6. Consider isolating the Ansible Automation Hub environment using containerization or sandboxing to limit the impact of potential exploitation. 7. Educate administrators on the risks of importing untrusted content and enforce policies to only use verified sources for automation content. 8. Employ network segmentation and access controls to restrict exposure of the Ansible Automation Hub to untrusted networks or users.

Description

A path traversal vulnerability exists in Ansible when extracting tarballs. An attacker could craft a malicious tarball so that when using the galaxy importer of Ansible Automation Hub, a symlink could be dropped on the disk, resulting in files being overwritten.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2023-5189 lies in the potential unauthorized modification of critical configuration and operational files managed by Ansible Automation Platform. This can disrupt automation workflows, cause misconfigurations, or introduce malicious changes that may be leveraged for lateral movement or privilege escalation. Since Ansible is widely used in IT infrastructure automation, compromised integrity could affect multiple systems and services, leading to operational disruptions or security breaches. The vulnerability does not directly impact availability or confidentiality but can indirectly facilitate further attacks. Organizations in sectors with high automation reliance, such as finance, telecommunications, manufacturing, and government, are at greater risk. The requirement for some privileges and user interaction reduces the likelihood of widespread automated exploitation but does not eliminate targeted attacks. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently limits immediate risk, but proactive mitigation is essential to prevent future exploitation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Nov 2025, 17:45 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats