CVE-2023-40570 is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.3) CWE-213 vulnerability in datasette. A fix is available for datasette — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Datasette 1.0 alpha series leaks names of databases and tables to unauthenticated users
Exploitation Status
No confirmed exploitation observed yet
- CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
- CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2023-40570.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
How urgent is this, really
CVE-2023-40570 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 377,636 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
Real-World Exposure
datasetteReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Impact
This bug affects Datasette instances running a Datasette 1.0 alpha - 1.0a0, 1.0a1, 1.0a2 or 1.0a3 - in an online accessible location but with authentication enabled using a plugin such as datasette-auth-passwords.
The /-/api API explorer endpoint could reveal the names of both databases and tables - but not their contents - to an unauthenticated user.
Patches
Datasette 1.0a4 has a fix for this issue.
Workarounds
To work around this issue, block all traffic to the /-/api endpoint. This can be done with a proxy such as Apache or NGINX, or by installing the datasette-block plugin and adding the following configuration to your metadata.json or metadata.yml file:
{
"plugins": {
"datasette-block": {
"prefixes": ["/-/api"]
}
}
}
This will block access to the API explorer but will still allow access to the Datasette read or write JSON APIs, as those use different URL patterns within the Datasette /database hierarchy.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐍PyPI | datasette | ≥ 1.0a0&&< 1.0a4 | 1.0a4pip install --upgrade 'datasette==1.0a4' |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for datasette, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update datasette to 1.0a4 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2023-40570 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2023-40570 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to CVE-2023-40570. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2023-40570 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds CVE-2023-40570 across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.