CVE-2023-5455VulnerabilityPublished 10 Jan 2024Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2023-5455: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Affects Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 47% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within 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 10 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 2026-10-25.

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
Red Hat Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7	Affected *	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2023-5455, European organizations should: 1) Apply any available patches or updates from Red Hat promptly once released, as patching is the most effective defense. 2) Implement or verify strict CSRF protections on all IPA HTTP endpoints, ensuring tokens are validated for state-changing requests. 3) Enforce multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of unauthorized authentication attempts induced by CSRF. 4) Educate users about the risks of phishing and malicious websites that could trigger CSRF attacks, emphasizing cautious behavior when interacting with unknown links. 5) Monitor IPA logs and network traffic for unusual or unauthorized requests that could indicate exploitation attempts. 6) Consider network segmentation and access controls to limit exposure of IPA services to only trusted networks and users. 7) Regularly review and update security policies related to identity and access management to incorporate lessons learned from this vulnerability.

Description

A Cross-site request forgery vulnerability exists in ipa/session/login_password in all supported versions of IPA. This flaw allows an attacker to trick the user into submitting a request that could perform actions as the user, resulting in a loss of confidentiality and system integrity. During community penetration testing it was found that for certain HTTP end-points FreeIPA does not ensure CSRF protection. Due to implementation details one cannot use this flaw for reflection of a cookie representing already logged-in user. An attacker would always have to go through a new authentication attempt.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a moderate risk primarily to the integrity of systems running Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 with IPA services. Attackers could leverage CSRF to perform unauthorized actions on behalf of users, potentially altering configurations or policies managed by IPA. While confidentiality is not directly compromised, unauthorized changes could lead to broader security issues or service disruptions. Organizations in sectors such as government, finance, telecommunications, and critical infrastructure that rely on IPA for identity and policy management are particularly at risk. The requirement for user interaction and new authentication attempts limits the ease of exploitation but does not eliminate the threat, especially in environments where users might be targeted via phishing or malicious websites. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but should not lead to complacency given the potential impact on system integrity.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Nov 2025, 18:44 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats