BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2023
CVE-2023-40743High confidence

Apache Axis 1.x (EOL) may allow RCE when untrusted input is passed to getService

Apache Software Foundation · Apache Axis

9.8CriticalCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Within 72 hours

Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.

Patch available
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityCriticalOperational priority:Critical, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
  • EPSS is 3.28% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Apache Software Foundation Apache Axis and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: Within 3 daysRemediation target: Within 90 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Debian findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

4 package states
Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourceaxisVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1.4-29Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourceaxisVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1.4-28+deb12u1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourceaxisVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1.4-29Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourceaxisVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1.4-29Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Open-source package ranges2 source-attributed ranges

These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.

Ecosystem and packageAffected rangeFirst fixed versionEvidence
mavenaxis:axis<= 1.4Not statedGitHub advisory ↗github reviewed aggregator · 13 Feb 2025
mavenorg.apache.axis:axis<= 1.4Not statedGitHub advisory ↗github reviewed aggregator · 13 Feb 2025
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2023-2587

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 72 hours

Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.

Patch available
01

What, why and how

** UNSUPPORTED WHEN ASSIGNED ** When integrating Apache Axis 1.x in an application, it may not have been obvious that looking up a service through "ServiceFactory.getService" allows potentially dangerous lookup mechanisms such as LDAP. When passing untrusted input to this API method, this could expose the application to DoS, SSRF and even attacks leading to RCE. As Axis 1 has been EOL we recommend you migrate to a different SOAP engine, such as Apache Axis 2/Java. As a workaround, you may review your code to verify no untrusted or unsanitized input is passed to "ServiceFactory.getService", or by applying the patch from https://github.com/apache/axis-axis1-java/commit/7e66753427466590d6def0125e448d2791723210 . The Apache Axis project does not expect to create an Axis 1.x release fixing this problem, though contributors that would like to work towards this are welcome.

What

** UNSUPPORTED WHEN ASSIGNED ** When integrating Apache Axis 1.x in an application, it may not have been obvious that looking up a service through "ServiceFactory.getService" allows potentially dangerous lookup mechanisms such as LDAP. When passing untrusted input to this API method, this could expose the application to DoS, SSRF and even attacks leading to RCE. As Axis 1 has been EOL we recommend you migrate to a different SOAP engine, such as Apache Axis 2/Java. As a workaround, you may review your code to verify no untrusted or unsanitized input is passed to "ServiceFactory.getService", or by applying the patch from https://github.com/apache/axis-axis1-java/commit/7e66753427466590d6def0125e448d2791723210 . The Apache Axis project does not expect to create an Axis 1.x release fixing this problem, though contributors that would like to work towards this are welcome.

Why

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

** UNSUPPORTED WHEN ASSIGNED ** When integrating Apache Axis 1.x in an application, it may not have been obvious that looking up a service through "ServiceFactory.getService" allows potentially dangerous lookup mechanisms such as LDAP. When passing untrusted input to this API method, this could expose the application to DoS, SSRF and even attacks leading to RCE. As Axis 1 has been EOL we recommend you migrate to a different SOAP engine, such as Apache Axis 2/Java. As a workaround, you may review your code to verify no untrusted or unsanitized input is passed to "ServiceFactory.getService", or by applying the patch from https://github.com/apache/axis-axis1-java/commit/7e66753427466590d6def0125e448d2791723210 . The Apache Axis project does not expect to create an Axis 1.x release fixing this problem, though contributors that would like to work towards this are welcome.

Why

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
a network path → Improper Input Validation → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-20 ↗

CWE-20: Improper Input Validation. The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
NetworkUnauthenticatedCWE-20
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

BSI · German · WID-SEC-2024-0543IBM WebSphere Service Registry and Repository: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein entfernter Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in IBM WebSphere Service Registry and Repository ausnutzen, um beliebigen Code auszuführen, einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand zu verursachen oder vertrauliche Informationen offenzulegen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20230906Security Bulletin 06 Sep 2023

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 06 Sep 2023, published on 6 September 2023. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2024-AVI-0199Multiples vulnérabilités dans IBM

d?id=CVE-2023-22602 Référence CVE CVE-2023-25153 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-25153 Référence CVE CVE-2023-25173 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-25173 Référence CVE CVE-2023-33850 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-33850 Référence CVE CVE-2023-34478 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-34478 Référence CVE CVE-2023-36478 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-36478 Référence CVE CVE-2023-36479 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-36479 Référence CVE CVE-2023-39325 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-39325 Référence CVE CVE-2023-40167 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-40167 Référence CVE CVE-2023-40743 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-40743 Référence CVE CVE-2023-41900 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-41900 Référence CVE CVE-2023-42282 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-42282 Référence CVE CVE-2023-44487 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-44487 Référence CVE CVE-2023-45857 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-45857 Référence CVE CVE-2023-47248 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-47248 Référence CVE CVE-2023-5676 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-5676 Référence CVE CVE-2024-20918 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-20918 Référence CVE CVE-2024-20921 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CV

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2024-AVI-0090Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits IBM

De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans les produits IBM . Certaines d'entre elles permettent à un attaquant de provoquer une injection de code indirecte à distance (XSS), une exécution de code arbitraire à distance et une atteinte à la confidentialité des données.

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2023-012448Apache Software Foundation の Apache Axis における入力確認に関する脆弱性

** サポート外 ** 本件は、サポートされていない製品における脆弱性です。 Apache Software Foundation の Apache Axis には、入力確認に関する脆弱性が存在します。

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Patch available
Affected
Apache Axis: ≤ 1.3
Fixed
An authoritative update reference is available, but the fixed version is not recorded in the structured CVE fields. Check the linked vendor advisory for the applicable release.
Action
Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 5 Sept 2023 · Last source change 13 Feb 2025, 17:08 UTC · CWE-20 · Improper Input Validation

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2023-2587
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2023-40743 · cve.blacktree.nl