Vigilbase CVEConnect your agent

PaperCut NG/MF Improper Authentication Vulnerability

Exploited · KEV 2026-04-20RansomwareCVE-2023-27351CWE-287

Exploited since 2026-04-20. 1 of 8 rule sources name it. Our CRS test: not blocked.

Edge rules
1/8
Our test
Not blocked
CVSS
8.2
EPSS
78.1% Top 0.4%
Posts, 14d
02026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 0 posts2026-11-03: 0 posts
Published
2023-04-20
This vulnerability allows remote attackers to bypass authentication on affected installations of PaperCut NG 22.0.5 (Build 63914). Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the… More

This vulnerability allows remote attackers to bypass authentication on affected installations of PaperCut NG 22.0.5 (Build 63914). Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the SecurityRequestFilter class. The issue results from improper implementation of the authentication algorithm. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to bypass authentication on the system. Was ZDI-CAN-19226.

Ask Vigil

AI · answers from this page
Ask about CVE-2023-27351: who's covered, what to patch first, how vendors compare. I cite sources and won't help with attacks.

Workers AI (Llama 3.3). Can be wrong: check the cited source.

Severity, decoded

CVSS 3.0
High · 8.2 / 10

Exploitable over the network, with no privileges and no user interaction, leading to full loss of confidentiality and low impact on integrity.

Over the internetNo login neededNo user actionWorks reliablySerious impact
How the score is built8 metrics
  • Attack vectorAn attacker can reach it over the internet; no access to your network needed.
    Network
  • Attack complexityNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
    Low
  • Privileges requiredNo account or login is needed.
    None
  • User interactionNo one has to click or open anything; the attack works on its own.
    None
  • ScopeThe damage stays within the vulnerable component.
    Unchanged
  • Confidentiality impactAn attacker can read all data the affected component holds, or the most sensitive parts of it.
    High
  • Integrity impactAn attacker can change some data, but with limited control or limited effect.
    Low
  • Availability impactThe component keeps working normally.
    None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CISA's assessmentSSVC, from the CVE record
ExploitationActive

Attackers are exploiting this in the wild.

AutomatableYes

Attackers can script the attack end to end and hit many targets at once.

Technical impactTotal

A successful attack gives full control over the affected software or all of its data.

Public exploits

1 found
0 Metasploit0 Exploit-DB1 Scanner template0 GitHub PoCs

Links are to third-party code: never run it outside an isolated lab.

Timeline

  1. 2023-04-20
    CVE published
    CVE List
  2. 2026-04-20
    Added to CISA KEV
    Confirmed exploitation in the wild
  3. 2026-07-07
    F5 ships a rule
    PaperCut NG Authentication Bypass
  4. 2026-11-02
    Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set let it through
    paranoia level 1, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings
  5. 2026-11-02
    Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set let it through
    paranoia level 2, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings

Social

2026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 0 posts2026-11-03: 0 posts

No posts seen yet on X, Bluesky, Mastodon, Hacker News or GitHub.

Vendor statements

Quoted
CloudflareWAF Managed RulesBefore feed history

The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.

AWSAWS WAF Managed RulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. AWS often describes a vulnerability without naming its CVE (for example "Log4j"). We count only entries that name the CVE, so AWS coverage is understated.

Microsoft AzureFront Door and Application Gateway WAF (DRS)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The rule tables name CVEs but carry no dates, so Azure is left out of every time-to-rule figure.

Google CloudCloud Armor preconfigured WAF rulesBefore feed history

The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.

FastlyNext-Gen WAF virtual patchesBefore feed history

The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.

F5Attack signatures (Distributed Cloud WAF)1 quoteRule published

First rule 2026-07-07, 1174 days after the CVE was published.

2026-07-07New rule200013186Source
Added: signature 200013186 "PaperCut NG Authentication Bypass" (Authentication/Authorization Attacks, risk High), systems: Other Web Server. References: CVE-2023-27351.
AkamaiApp & API Protector (Adaptive Security Engine)No public source

This vendor publishes no machine-readable rule changelog we can check.

OWASP CRSCore Rule Set (open source, used inside many WAFs)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. CRS rarely names CVEs: it relies on generic detections. Our own lab measures what it actually blocks.