CVE-2023-6548VulnerabilityPublished 17 Jan 2024Updated 21 Oct 2025

CVE-2023-6548: Cloud Software Group NetScaler ADC · Code Injection

Affects Cloud Software Group NetScaler ADCSource CVE Database V5

Exploited in the wild · KEV due 24 Jan 2024 · 3% EPSS : apply the vendor's fix or mitigations to Cloud Software Group NetScaler ADC now.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.5Medium

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

KEV deadline: 24 Jan 2024 US federal agencies must patch by this date; a sensible deadline for everyone else.
EPSS: 3.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 88% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent
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: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
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

t = 0 is the CVE’s publication on cve.org

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 17 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: evidence found.
Listed in CISA KEV the same day as disclosure
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

CVE ID reserved
by Citrix
2023-12-0611:01Z, 42 days before disclosure
CVE published
on cve.org
2024-01-1720:11Z, t = 0
Added to CISA KEV (opens in a new tab)
exploitation confirmed
2024-01-17, the same day as disclosure
KEV remediation due
US federal deadline
2024-01-24, 7 days after disclosure

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), CISA KEV (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

Apply mitigations per vendor instructions or discontinue use of the product if mitigations are unavailable.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Cloud Software Group NetScaler ADC	Affected =14.1 =13.1 =13.0 =13.1-FIPS =12.1-FIPS =12.1-NDcPP	Fixed in–

Description

Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway allows an attacker with access to NSIP, CLIP or SNIP with management interface to perform Authenticated (low privileged) remote code execution on Management Interface.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2023-6548 can be significant, particularly for those relying on NetScaler ADC and Gateway appliances for application delivery, load balancing, and secure remote access. Successful exploitation could lead to remote code execution on critical network infrastructure, potentially allowing attackers to manipulate traffic, intercept sensitive data, disrupt services, or pivot deeper into internal networks. Confidentiality could be compromised through unauthorized data access, integrity through manipulation of network traffic or configurations, and availability through service disruption or denial of service. Organizations in sectors such as finance, government, healthcare, and telecommunications, which often use Citrix NetScaler products, could face operational disruptions and data breaches. The requirement for authenticated access somewhat limits the attack surface but does not eliminate risk, especially if credential compromise or insider threats exist. The lack of known exploits in the wild provides a window for proactive mitigation before widespread attacks occur.

Mitigation

1. Restrict access to NSIP, CLIP, and SNIP management interfaces strictly to trusted administrators and secure management networks using network segmentation and firewall rules. 2. Enforce strong authentication mechanisms, including multi-factor authentication (MFA), for all users accessing management interfaces to reduce the risk of credential compromise. 3. Monitor and audit access logs for unusual or unauthorized access attempts to management interfaces. 4. 5. Disable or limit management interface exposure to the internet or untrusted networks wherever possible. 6. Employ intrusion detection and prevention systems (IDS/IPS) to detect anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. 7. Conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focusing on management interface security. 8. Educate administrators on the risks of low-privilege authenticated access and the importance of credential hygiene.

CWE-94Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #10OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
Architecture and Design · Refactoring
Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
Architecture and Design
Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.2.8 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating User-Controlled Variables (opens in a new tab)
Code Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

Timeline

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 21 Oct 2025, 20:01 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-94

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats