vciy

CVE-2023-28117

INDEX BUILT · 2026-09-20

No source can show you its own past. This one can.

Print this page to keep the view as it stands on this date. Everything hidden behind a disclosure opens, and every receipt prints with its value.

Sentry SDK leaks sensitive session information when `sendDefaultPII` is set to `True`

CVE-2023-281174 of 4 sources documented this
18

rank 18 = 0 + 16 + 0 + 2 + 0

rank@v1 · backlog

Someone is already using it

CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS

EPSS 0.00647  ·  without this subject the record ranks 18

What it costs you if it fires

NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own

CVSS 6.5, from NVD  ·  without this subject the record ranks 2

It is getting worse, not staying still

FIRST EPSS series, rescorings and bad loads removed

no persisting rise in 365 days  ·  without this subject the record ranks 18

How much of the world it touches

NVD CPE configurations

1 product in the CPE ranges  ·  without this subject the record ranks 16

Someone else already set the date

CISA KEV remediation due date

no CISA due date  ·  without this subject the record ranks 18

Unaudited dollar value2 of 3 inputs carry a receipt
Exposure$23,200over the next 30 days, if this record is yours
Movementno material movementthe record holds only daily drift and scoring model releases
Basisassumeda published average, not your estate

$23,200 = $4.99M incident cost x 0.7179585840212677 exposure x 0.00647 likelihood

udv@v1 · unaudited · wrong for you until you say what you run

$4.99M is the cost of a breach that happened, from IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2026, global average. It is not the value of any asset of yours. That average already covers breaches of every severity, so scaling it by exposure understates a partial-impact record. That is an assumption, not a measurement. Your own asset value goes in the decision record.

Hindsight · the state

0.00647EPSSNOT IN KEVas of 2026-09-20
Severity7.6 HIGHreceipt
Harmpartial impactreceipt
Exploitationnone in held sources
Defenseunaffected versions publishedreceipt
Movementrisenreceipt
PLATEAU10Minimal movement since 2023-03-23, 1257 days at 0.01, as of 2026-08-31. arc-rules@v1

Foresight · where to check next

No weakness class or product neighbourhood is held for this record, so this index cannot name anywhere to check next. That is an absence in the record, not a finding about the software.

Color is a claim, not decoration:the hostile worldthe defenseno signal

Sources disagree here.

Severity score
GitHub_M7.6 HIGHreceipt
NVD6.5 MEDIUMreceipt
What it costs
GitHub_MComplete confidentiality loss; partial integrity loss, with impact beyond the vulnerable componentreceipt
NVDComplete confidentiality lossreceipt

Both shown, dated. We don't pick winners. disagreement-rules@v1

Running getsentry sentry-python? Check your version

A deterministic range check against the ranges this record publishes. It tells you where a version sits in the record, not whether your deployment is exploitable. No account needed.

Watch this record

Matches your own product list against every record this index holds, and tells you when one of them moves.

What counts as a move

Set up a watchlist (needs a Practitioner account)

Record your call

Keep your verdict, your reason and the evidence together. The record takes its date when you save it.

AcceptDeferPatch by…Not affectedMitigated

Choose your verdict, then sign in or use an email link. Your first 100 records are free. Evidence is frozen when the record is created.

Private to your organization unless you share it. Put the proof link in your ticket so a reviewer can inspect the basis for your call. See how decision records work.

Harm, if it fires from the vector and the weakness

Written for the ticket you're about to file.

Reachnetwork-reachable · high privileges required · no user interaction · low attack complexityreceipt
ImpactComplete confidentiality loss; partial integrity loss, with impact beyond the vulnerable componentreceipt
Scored fromCVSS v3.1 · the CNA's vectorreceipt
Weakness classCWE-201 Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data; CWE-209 Generation of Error Message Containing Sensitive Informationreceipt
Published consequencesCWE-201: Confidentiality: Read Files or Directories, Read Memory, Read Application Data[email protected]

CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA

The fix, and how long it's been waiting.

First unaffected version, by branchsoftware development kit 1.14.0receipt
Patch available sinceNo dated patch-availability record in held sources. The index holds reference URLs without dates and only the current revision of the CVE record, so the day a fix first existed cannot be derived. Only the versions it landed in.

Exploit Status & Known PoCs a ladder, not a score

Current rung: Nothing observed in held sources.

  • RUNG 1Nothing observed in held sources
  • RUNG 2Proof-of-concept published
  • RUNG 3Exploited in the wild · CISA KEV listed
  • RUNG 4Ransomware campaign use known

Authority who says so

CVSS, the CNA7.6 HIGHreceipt
CVSS, NVD6.5 MEDIUMreceipt
Exploit probability0.00647 · top 50% of all CVEsreceipt
Blast breadth1 product across 1 vendorderived
Assigned byGitHub_Mreceipt
Recorded changes27 · last 19 Sep 2026derived

Affected & Fixed Versions as published

Affected productgetsentry sentry-pythonreceipt
Published rangessentry software development kit < 1.14.0receipt

A rung lights from a row in the index, never from an assessment. "Held sources" is the true scope of the claim: this index reads the CVE record, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST's EPSS and public proof-of-concept repositories, and it does not observe attacks.

Did this affect your environment?Answering needs an account.

Attack path

Network requestrequires high privilegesgetsentry sentry-pythonCWE-201 weaknessAdjacent componentsscope changeConfidentiality lossC:Hexploits CWE-201scope changedata compromise

What it is stated by the CNA

Sentry SDK is the official Python SDK for Sentry, real-time crash reporting software. When using the Django integration of versions prior to 1.14.0 of the Sentry SDK in a specific configuration it is possible to leak sensitive cookies values, including the session cookie to Sentry. These sensitive cookies could then be used by someone with access to your Sentry issues to impersonate or escalate their privileges within your application. In order for these sensitive values to be leaked, the Sentry SDK configuration must have `sendDefaultPII` set to `True`; one must use a custom name for either `SESSION_COOKIE_NAME` or `CSRF_COOKIE_NAME` in one's Django settings; and one must not be configured receipt

Read the rest of the CNA's description

in one's organization or project settings to use Sentry's data scrubbing features to account for the custom cookie names. As of version 1.14.0, the Django integration of the `sentry-sdk` will detect the custom cookie names based on one's Django settings and will remove the values from the payload before sending the data to Sentry. As a workaround, use the SDK's filtering mechanism to remove the cookies from the payload that is sent to Sentry. For error events, this can be done with the `before_send` callback method and for performance related events (transactions) one can use the `before_send_transaction` callback method. Those who want to handle filtering of these values on the server-side can also use Sentry's advanced data scrubbing feature to account for the custom cookie names. Look for the `$http.cookies`, `$http.headers`, `$request.cookies`, or `$request.headers` fields to target with a scrubbing rule.

NVD's analysis a second authority

severity
6.5 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
weakness
CWE-201; CWE-209
affected versions
sentry software development kit < 1.14.0
also scored by
[email protected] 7.6 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N

The CNA scored it 7.6 and NVD 6.5. Both are shown because both were published; we do not pick one.

check it yourself github.com github.com github.com receipt

Movement the material steps

23 Mar 20230.00045
17 Mar 20250.00246 · scoring model v2025.03.14
15 Jun 20260.00641 · scoring model v2026.06.15
31 Aug 20260.00647
Show all 27 observations
23 Mar 20230.00045
29 Mar 20230.00058
20 Feb 20240.00063
28 Mar 20240.00090
1 Sep 20240.00088
12 Oct 20240.00090
17 Dec 20240.00084
17 Mar 20250.00246
19 Mar 20250.00263
29 Mar 20250.00396
30 Mar 20250.00263
15 Apr 20250.00135
30 May 20250.0014
30 Sep 20250.00154
22 Oct 20250.00158
4 Nov 20250.00154
18 Nov 20250.00289
21 Nov 20250.00154
15 Dec 20250.00192
16 Jan 20260.00205
12 Mar 20260.00198
23 Mar 20260.00208
24 Mar 20260.00233
9 Apr 20260.0027
15 Apr 20260.00398
15 Jun 20260.00641
31 Aug 20260.00647

27 observations held. A highlighted step crossed a promotion threshold. A step marked with a scoring model moved because the instrument was replaced, not because the vulnerability changed. receipt

The full biography

EPSS 0.00647Published2023-03-22Index as of2026-08-31

The record had been public for 3 years, 5 months when this index was last written.

Published 2023-03-22 receipt · Index as of 2026-08-31 derived

Siblings and hubs

Records related to this one

Browse the index from here

These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2023-28117.

What usually comes next

Everything above needs no account. What is below is work: assembling it, scoping it to your estate, watching it, and handing it to someone else.

Everything on this page is free. Public data. Withholding it protects nothing.