VulnerabilityPublished 12 Dec 2023Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2023-5764: Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.4 for RHEL 8 · Template Injection

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

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.1 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.1High

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 45% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 12 Dec 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

1. Apply official patches or updates from Red Hat as soon as they become available for Ansible Automation Platform 2.4 on RHEL 8. 2. Restrict access to the Ansible controller to trusted administrators only, enforcing strict access controls and monitoring. 3. Implement file integrity monitoring on template files and inputs to detect unauthorized modifications or suspicious files. 4. Use role-based access control (RBAC) within Ansible to limit who can supply or modify templates. 5. Audit and review all template files and automation scripts for unsafe or untrusted inputs. 6. Consider isolating the Ansible controller in a hardened environment with minimal network exposure. 7. Employ logging and alerting on anomalous template processing activities to detect exploitation attempts early. 8. Educate administrators about the risks of template injection and enforce secure coding practices in automation scripts. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on controlling template input sources, access restrictions, and proactive monitoring tailored to this vulnerability's nature.

Description

A template injection flaw was found in Ansible where a user's controller internal templating operations may remove the unsafe designation from template data. This issue could allow an attacker to use a specially crafted file to introduce templating injection when supplying templating data.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a serious risk to the confidentiality and integrity of automated workflows and sensitive data managed by Ansible Automation Platform. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to execute arbitrary code on the Ansible controller, potentially leading to unauthorized access to credentials, manipulation of infrastructure configurations, and lateral movement within the network. This is particularly critical for sectors relying heavily on automation for infrastructure management, such as finance, telecommunications, energy, and government. Since Ansible is widely used in enterprise environments across Europe, the vulnerability could disrupt critical services if exploited. The requirement for local access limits remote exploitation but insider threats or compromised accounts could leverage this flaw. The absence of known exploits provides a window for proactive defense, but the high severity demands immediate attention to prevent potential breaches.

Summary

CVE-2023-5764 is a template injection vulnerability identified in Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.4 running on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8. The root cause lies in the internal templating engine used by the Ansible controller, where the mechanism that marks template data as unsafe can be improperly neutralized or bypassed. This flaw allows an attacker who can supply template data—typically through files or inputs processed by the controller—to inject malicious template code. Because Ansible uses Jinja2 templating extensively for automation tasks, this injection can lead to arbitrary code execution within the controller's environment. The vulnerability requires local access with low privileges (AV:L, PR:L) but does not require user interaction (UI:N). The CVSS score of 7.1 reflects high impact on confidentiality and integrity, as an attacker could potentially read or modify sensitive automation workflows or credentials managed by Ansible. However, availability is not impacted. No public exploits or active exploitation have been reported yet, but the vulnerability poses a significant risk due to the critical role Ansible plays in automating IT infrastructure. The lack of patch links suggests that remediation may require vendor updates or configuration changes to restrict template input sources. Organizations relying on Ansible for orchestration and configuration management should assess their exposure and apply mitigations promptly.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Nov 2025, 18:34 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats