CVE-2023-41329

Domain restrictions bypass via DNS Rebinding in WireMock and WireMock Studio

MEDIUM
6.6
CVSS Score
Published: September 6, 2023 at 08:34 PM UTC
Updated: June 17, 2026 at 06:21 AM UTC
4 products affected across 1 vendorWiremockStudioPython Wiremock

Using wiremock by wiremock?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect wiremock - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
MEDIUM6.6
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.6%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

WireMock is a tool for mocking HTTP services. The proxy mode of WireMock, can be protected by the network restrictions configuration, as documented in Preventing proxying to and recording from specific target addresses. These restrictions can be configured using the domain names, and in such a case the configuration is vulnerable to the DNS rebinding attacks. A similar patch was applied in WireMock 3.0.0-beta-15 for the WireMock Webhook Extensions. The root cause of the attack is a defect in the logic which allows for a race condition triggered by a DNS server whose address expires in between the initial validation and the outbound network request that might go to a domain that was supposed to be prohibited. Control over a DNS service is required to exploit this attack, so it has high execution complexity and limited impact. This issue has been addressed in version 2.35.1 of wiremock-jre8 and wiremock-jre8-standalone, version 3.0.3 of wiremock and wiremock-standalone, version 2.6.1 of the python version of wiremock, and versions 2.35.1-1 and 3.0.3-1 of the wiremock/wiremock Docker container. Users are advised to upgrade. Users unable to upgrade should either configure firewall rules to define the list of permitted destinations or to configure WireMock to use IP addresses instead of the domain names.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

v < 2.6.1
Affected range stops below 2.6.1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
v ≤ 2.32.0-17
v < 2.35.1v < 2.35.1-1v < 2.6.1v < 3.0.3v < 3.0.3-13.0.0 ≤ v < 3.0.3
Affected range stops below 2.35.1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 2.35.1-1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 2.6.1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.0.3, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.0.3-1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
2.0.0 ≤ v < 2.35.1-13.0.0 ≤ v < 3.0.3-1
Affected range stops below 2.35.1-1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.0.3-1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet. What the record does show:

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitNot automatablePartial impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

Attack Vector
NETWORK
Complexity
HIGH
Privileges
HIGH
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
HIGH
Integrity
HIGH
Availability
HIGH
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusMODIFIED
CWE
CWE-290

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card