Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
Jenkins Exclusion plugin versions before 0.9 could let a logged-in remote user view or release resource locks they should not control. For executives, the main risk is disruption or manipulation of CI scheduling and shared build resources, not unauthenticated takeover.
Executive priority
Treat as a targeted CI operations risk. Prioritize remediation where Jenkins controls production deployment pipelines, scarce shared resources, or sensitive build workflows.
Technical view
The flaw is improper access prevention around Exclusion plugin resource locks. The CVE states authenticated remote users can list and release resources through unspecified vectors. No CVSS, CWE, detailed exploit path, or affected CPE data is provided in the supplied sources.
Likely exposure
Exposure is limited to Jenkins environments using the Exclusion plugin before version 0.9, especially where many users have authenticated Jenkins access. The supplied affected-product metadata is incomplete.
Exploitation context
The source bundle does not cite active exploitation, and the CVE is not listed as KEV. Exploitation requires authentication, but the vectors are unspecified, so validation should focus on version inventory and access review rather than reproduction.
Researcher notes
Evidence is sparse: the CVE gives the affected version boundary and impact, but not CVSS, CWE, vectors, or proof of exploitation. Avoid assuming unauthenticated access, code execution, or broader Jenkins compromise.
Mitigation direction
- Identify Jenkins instances using the Exclusion plugin.
- Upgrade the Exclusion plugin to version 0.9 or later.
- Review Jenkins authenticated user access for unnecessary broad accounts.
- Check Jenkins advisory and plugin documentation for vendor-specific guidance.
Validation and detection
- Confirm whether the Exclusion plugin is installed on each Jenkins controller.
- Record installed plugin versions and flag versions before 0.9.
- Review who has authenticated access to affected Jenkins instances.
- Look for unexpected resource lock releases in available Jenkins operational records.
Public sources used
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
CVE-2013-6373 mapping review
Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.
Open ATT&CK lookup- Severity
- Unknown
- CVSS
- Not scored
- Known Exploited
- No
- Published
CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
CVSS and timeline data
No CVSS vectors or timeline events were available in the normalized CVE source material.
Source materials
- CVE List V5 sourceCVE List V5
- https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/SECURITY/Jenkins+Security+Advisory+2013-11-20CVE reference · x_refsource_MISC
- https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Exclusion-PluginCVE reference · x_refsource_CONFIRM
Products and packages named in the record
CWE details
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.