Vigilbase CVEConnect your agent

XWiki Platform Solr search discloses email addresses of users

Not in CISA KEVCVE-2023-50720CWE-200

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

Edge rules
1/8
Our test
Not blocked
CVSS
5.3
EPSS
59.1% Top 0.9%
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
2023-12-15
XWiki Platform is a generic wiki platform. Prior to versions 14.10.15, 15.5.2, and 15.7-rc-1, the Solr-based search in XWiki discloses the email addresses of users even when obfuscation of email addresses is enabled. To demonstrate the… More

XWiki Platform is a generic wiki platform. Prior to versions 14.10.15, 15.5.2, and 15.7-rc-1, the Solr-based search in XWiki discloses the email addresses of users even when obfuscation of email addresses is enabled. To demonstrate the vulnerability, search for `objcontent:email*` using XWiki's regular search interface. This has been fixed in XWiki 14.10.15, 15.5.2 and 15.7RC1 by not indexing email address properties when obfuscation is enabled. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.

Ask Vigil

AI · answers from this page
Ask about CVE-2023-50720: 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 3.1
Medium · 5.3 / 10

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

Over the internetNo login neededNo user actionWorks reliably
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 some data, but has no control over what they get.
    Low
  • Integrity impactData cannot be changed by the attacker.
    None
  • Availability impactThe component keeps working normally.
    None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

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. 2023-12-15
    CVE published
    CVE List
  2. 2024-08-13
    F5 ships a rule
    XWiki Information Disclosure (4)
  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

2026-10-21: 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)2 quotesRule published

First rule 2024-08-13, 242 days after the CVE was published.

2024-08-13New rule200009314Source
Added: signature 200009314 "XWiki Information Disclosure (4)" (Information Leakage, risk Medium), systems: Java Servlets/JSP, Apache Tomcat. References: CVE-2023-50720.
2024-09-17Updated200009314Source
Updated: signature 200009314 "XWiki Information Disclosure (4)" (Information Leakage, risk Medium), systems: Java Servlets/JSP, Apache Tomcat. References: CVE-2023-50720.
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.