Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2023-0242 is a high-severity Improper Privilege Management (CWE-269) vulnerability in Rapid7 Velociraptor. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, ranked at the 44th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-0469
Vulnerability Data
Rapid7 Velociraptor allows users to be created with different privileges on the server. Administrators are generally allowed to run any command on the server including writing arbitrary files. However, lower privilege users are generally forbidden from writing or modifying files…
more
on the server. The VQL copy() function applies permission checks for reading files but does not check for permission to write files. This allows a low privilege user (usually, users with the Velociraptor "investigator" role) to overwrite files on the server, including Velociraptor configuration files. To exploit this vulnerability, the attacker must already have a Velociraptor user account at a low privilege level (at least "analyst") and be able to log into the GUI and create a notebook where they can run the VQL query invoking the copy() VQL function. Typically, most users deploy Velociraptor with limited access to a trusted group (most users will be administrators within the GUI). This vulnerability is associated with program files https://github.Com/Velocidex/velociraptor/blob/master/vql/filesystem/copy.go https://github.Com/Velocidex/velociraptor/blob/master/vql/filesystem/copy.go and program routines copy(). This issue affects Velociraptor versions before 0.6.7-5. Version 0.6.7-5, released January 16, 2023, fixes the issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Policy addresses roles, responsibilities, and privilege management to prevent improper privilege assignments.
Access supervision ensures privileges are assigned and managed without improper escalation or retention.
Assigning group/role memberships and access authorizations (privileges) while reviewing accounts addresses improper privilege management.
Always invoking the reference monitor prevents missing authorization checks for protected resources.
Requires verification that authorization checks are present and operational for protected resources.
Requiring explicit authorization for each internal connection prevents missing authorization.
Restricting who can perform changes helps ensure privileges are managed properly rather than assigned broadly.
Manages privileges by authorizing only approved personnel and supervising those lacking required authorizations for maintenance.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
A.5.15 directly mandates determining access requirements, defining/enforcing topic-specific access control policy, assigning rights/restrictions by entity/role, consistency with classification, need-to-know, privileged access restrictions, segregation, formal authorization, and dynamic rules — which stops most improper privilege management from being exploitable; bounded remainder is flawed implementation of those rules (e.g. incorrect mapping or enforcement bugs).
A.5.18 directly governs the provisioning, review, modification and timely revocation of access rights (including for role changes, termination and privilege levels), which stops most improper privilege spheres from being exploitable even if the assignment flaw exists; the bounded remainder is flaws in the underlying enforcement mechanism itself (e.g. AC-3/A.8.3)
Defining and communicating authorization levels for each role limits the assignment of excessive or unnecessary privileges.
By requiring competent outsiders to verify that every function enforces the need-to-know principle, the control lowers the likelihood that missing authorization checks persist undetected.
A.5.8 integrates risk assessment, requirements elicitation and governance into the project lifecycle so that authorization needs can be identified and specified; it does not itself perform or enforce authorization checks, so the missing-authorization weakness can still be present and exploitable.
Logging every use of privileges and protecting those records makes it harder for an attacker who has obtained elevated rights to operate without leaving evidence.
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.