CVE-2023-21405
Axis Os ≤ 10.12.178
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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-2023-21405 is a medium-severity Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input (CWE-1286) vulnerability in Axis Axis Os. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique LSASS Memory (T1003.001); ranked at the 21th 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-2023-25573
Vulnerability Data
Knud from Fraktal.fi has found a flaw in some Axis Network Door Controllers and Axis Network Intercoms when communicating over OSDP, highlighting that the OSDP message parser crashes the pacsiod process, causing a temporary unavailability of the door-controlling functionalities meaning…
more
that doors cannot be opened or closed. No sensitive or customer data can be extracted as the Axis device is not further compromised. Please refer to the Axis security advisory for more information, mitigation and affected products and software versions.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.4.2V2.2.2V3.5.5V5.4.1
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.
Requires detection and response to audit logging failures as an unusual or exceptional condition.
Implements detection of unusual or exceptional conditions followed by safe mode entry, reducing the window for exploitation of unchecked conditions.
Training ensures users perform required checks for unusual or exceptional conditions as part of contingency roles, limiting attacker leverage from skipped validations.
IR testing directly validates checks for unusual or exceptional conditions that could indicate security incidents.
Requires ongoing monitoring of organization-defined metrics and analysis, enabling checks for unusual or exceptional conditions.
Security testing routinely checks for unusual or exceptional inputs/conditions, identifying missing validation steps that flaw remediation then resolves.
Requires detection of unusual conditions followed by a controlled transition to the defined failure state.
MTTF determination forces explicit checks for conditions that precede predictable component failure.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly require syntactic input validation to prevent malformed data handling.
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.
Logging can record unhandled exceptions but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Monitoring may detect symptoms of unhandled conditions but does not eliminate the root weakness.
A.8.25 mandates secure SDLC practices including secure coding guidelines, security requirements, checkpoints, testing (scans/penetration), and developer training that reach syntactic validation defects, but leaves a bounded remainder (e.g. incomplete enforcement across all parsers, second-order inputs, or outsourced components where assurance is only obtained not enforced).
Application security requirements explicitly call for validation of input syntax.
A.8.27 mandates security engineering principles including data validation/sanitization, distrust external input, security by design, and design reviews against attack patterns, which directly stops syntactic validation flaws from reaching production in most cases; the bounded remainder is incomplete application to outsourced development, legacy code, or post-design changes.
Secure coding standards directly require proper syntactic validation of all inputs.
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.
- No fine-grained STIG row for CWE-754, a class-level weakness. Rules are authored against its narrower children: CWE-354.