VulnerabilityPublished 19 Dec 2025

CVE-2023-53950: innovastudio WYSIWYG Editor · Unrestricted File Upload

Affects innovastudio WYSIWYG EditorSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.3 Critical.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

9.3Critical

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:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High
Vulnerable system integrity: High
Vulnerable system availability: High
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system 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 vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system availability: High: There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the Vulnerable System; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 19 Dec 2025
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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
innovastudio WYSIWYG Editor	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Apply official patches or updates from InnovaStudio as soon as they become available to address the vulnerability directly.
Implement strict server-side validation of uploaded files that goes beyond checking file extensions, including MIME type verification and content inspection to detect malicious payloads.
Disable execution permissions on directories used for file uploads to prevent execution of uploaded scripts or shells.
Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules designed to detect and block suspicious file upload attempts, including those using null byte or alternate extension techniques.
Monitor web server logs and file upload directories for unusual activity or presence of unexpected ASP files.
Restrict file upload functionality to authenticated and authorized users where possible to reduce exposure.
Conduct regular security audits and penetration testing focused on file upload mechanisms.
Educate development and operations teams about secure file handling practices and the risks of improper validation.
Consider isolating web applications using containerization or sandboxing to limit the impact of potential compromises.
Maintain up-to-date backups and incident response plans to enable rapid recovery if exploitation occurs.

Description

InnovaStudio WYSIWYG Editor 5.4 contains an unrestricted file upload vulnerability that allows attackers to bypass file extension restrictions through filename manipulation. Attackers can upload malicious ASP shells by using null byte techniques and alternate file extensions to circumvent upload controls in the asset manager.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2023-53950 can be severe. Successful exploitation allows attackers to execute arbitrary code on web servers hosting the vulnerable InnovaStudio WYSIWYG Editor, potentially leading to full system compromise. This can result in unauthorized access to sensitive data, disruption of critical services, defacement of websites, and use of compromised servers as launchpads for further attacks within corporate networks or against third parties. Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, government, and critical infrastructure are particularly at risk due to the sensitive nature of their data and the potential regulatory consequences of breaches under GDPR. The vulnerability's network accessibility and lack of authentication requirements increase the likelihood of exploitation, especially in externally facing web applications. Additionally, the use of ASP shells indicates targeting of Windows-based web servers, common in many European enterprises. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently provides a window for proactive defense, but the critical severity demands immediate attention to prevent future attacks. The reputational damage and financial costs associated with remediation, legal penalties, and operational downtime could be substantial for affected organizations.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…