Vigilbase CVEConnect your agent

CVE-2023-39677

Action requiredNot in CISA KEVCVE-2023-39677

Not confirmed exploited. 1 of 8 rule sources name it. Our CRS test: not blocked.

Edge rules
1/8
Our test
Not blocked
CVSS
—
EPSS
32.3% Top 2%
Posts, 14d
02026-10-22: 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 posts2026-11-04: 0 posts
Published
2023-09-20

MyPrestaModules Prestashop Module v6.2.9 and UpdateProducts Prestashop Module v3.6.9 were discovered to contain a PHPInfo information disclosure vulnerability via send.php.

Action requiredLast checked 2026-11-03

The risk

A public scanner template probes for it. EPSS ranks it in the top 2% of CVEs most likely to be exploited in the next 30 days. Exploitation in the wild is not established by CISA KEV.

Next steps

  1. Apply the vendor's fix; the advisory lists the affected and fixed versions.
  2. Keep a WAF rule in place while you patch: F5 ships a rule you may need to switch on. A WAF rule reduces exposure; it does not replace the patch. Edge coverage
  3. Check which WAF sits in front of your site and whether it covers this CVE. Check your domain

Attack traffic on Cloudflare

Cloudflare Radar
  • Rules for named CVEs5.9% of mitigated layer 7 attacks, 7 days2026-10-06: 0.6%2026-10-07: 1.8%2026-10-08: 3%2026-10-09: 6.3%2026-10-10: 1.9%2026-10-11: 0.8%2026-10-12: 0.6%2026-10-13: 0.6%2026-10-14: 4.2%2026-10-15: 2.3%2026-10-16: 1.3%2026-10-17: 1.6%2026-10-18: 1.1%2026-10-19: 3.2%2026-10-20: 4.7%2026-10-21: 5.7%2026-10-22: 5.5%2026-10-23: 9.8%2026-10-24: 7%2026-10-25: 5%2026-10-26: 7.3%2026-10-27: 8.1%2026-10-28: 10.1%2026-10-29: 0.9%2026-10-30: 4.1%2026-10-31: 7.5%2026-11-01: 8.7%2026-11-02: 2.4%2026-11-03: 9.1%

Radar groups Cloudflare's WAF managed rules by category; it does not publish counts per CVE. These shares show how much attack traffic targets this kind of flaw across Cloudflare's network (28-day trend). They are not compromised systems, and seeing few attempts on Cloudflare does not prove an absence elsewhere. Radar data as of 2026-11-03. Radar ↗

Check your exposure with an agent

Read-only

Copy this into an agent with access to your infrastructure. It asks for an evidence-based, read-only assessment: affected systems, exposure, compensating controls and what is still unknown. It does not scan or change anything by itself.

Prompt12 lines
Assess whether the infrastructure available to you is affected by CVE-2023-39677 (CVE-2023-39677). Perform a read-only assessment within your authorized access. Do not send exploit traffic, scan third-party systems, change configuration or restart services.

1. Verify the CVE record at https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-39677 and the vendor advisory. Establish affected and fixed versions, including vendor backports. Cite sources and retrieval dates; flag anything you cannot verify.
2. Inventory deployments of CVE-2023-39677: asset, environment, owner where known, installed version or build, and how you confirmed it (package metadata, a version endpoint, image tags). An image tag alone does not prove the running version.
3. Identify which deployments are reachable from the internet or untrusted networks, and through which paths (direct origin, load balancer, CDN or WAF).
4. Assess compensating controls separately from patch status. Current edge WAF coverage for this CVE: F5: rule exists, check whether it is enabled. Live data: https://cve.vigilbase.com/api/v1/cves/CVE-2023-39677. Check whether the rule is enabled and in block mode on each path, and whether any path bypasses the WAF. A WAF rule is not a patch.
5. Check logs on exposed instances for requests matching the public exploit, if your access allows.

Return a short summary and a table: asset | version/build | assessment (affected, fixed, not applicable, unknown) | exposure | compensating control | evidence | next action. List what you could not assess and the access needed to resolve it. Do not infer absence of compromise from patch status or a lack of alerts.

Remediation guidance: Apply the vendor's fix; the advisory lists the affected and fixed versions. Keep a WAF rule in place while you patch: F5 ships a rule you may need to switch on. A WAF rule reduces exposure; it does not replace the patch.
More: https://cve.vigilbase.com/cve/CVE-2023-39677

Sources

Cited
CVE record

No CVSS score in the record.

CVE-2023-39677 ↗NVD ↗

Exploit evidence

A nuclei template exists, which our lab and benchmark replay.

CISA KEV

Not in the KEV catalog (catalog 2026.11.03, checked 2026-11-04). Absence from KEV is not evidence that it cannot be exploited.

CISA KEV catalog ↗

EPSS

32.3% probability of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, higher than 98% of CVEs (2026-11-02).

FIRST EPSS ↗

WAF vendor statements

F5 names it in a changelog. Quotes and dates below.

Vendor statements

Ask Vigil

AI · answers from this page
Ask about CVE-2023-39677: who's covered, what to patch first, how vendors compare. I cite sources and won't help with attacks.

Severity, decoded

CISA's assessmentSSVC, from the CVE record
ExploitationProof of concept

Public exploit code or a detailed write-up exists, but CISA has not seen attacks.

AutomatableYes

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

Technical impactPartial

A successful attack gives limited control over the affected software or limited access to 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. 2023-09-20
    CVE published
    CVE List
  2. 2024-01-16
    F5 ships a rule
    PrestaShop Sensitive Information Disclosure
  3. 2026-11-02
    Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set let it through
    paranoia level 1, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings
  4. 2026-11-02
    Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set let it through
    paranoia level 2, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings

Social

2026-10-22: 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 posts2026-11-04: 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 2024-01-16, 118 days after the CVE was published.

2024-01-16New rule200009294Source
Added: signature 200009294 "PrestaShop Sensitive Information Disclosure" (Information Leakage, risk Medium), systems: PHP. References: CVE-2023-39677.
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.