Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/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-2023-22297 is a high-severity Access of Memory Location After End of Buffer (CWE-788) vulnerability in Intel Server System D50Tnp1Mhcrlc Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 8.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data Obfuscation (T1001); ranked at the 9th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-26461
Vulnerability Data
Access of memory location after end of buffer in some Intel(R) Server Board BMC firmware before version 2.90 may allow a privileged user to enable escalation of privilege via local access.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.4.1
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.
Ongoing control assessments and code testing (static/dynamic analysis, fuzzing) surface memory buffer restriction failures, which are then remediated before release.
Managed runtimes used by platform-independent applications (e.g., JVM, CLR) enforce memory safety, preventing most buffer overflows that require direct memory manipulation.
Memory protections (e.g., W^X, ASLR) make exploitation of buffer-boundary violations far harder to turn into code execution.
Detects exploitation attempts that produce memory corruption, crashes, or anomalous behavior.
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 bounds checking and input validation that prevent out-of-bounds buffer accesses.
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.8.25 mandates secure SDLC practices (secure coding guidelines, security requirements, checkpoints, testing including code scans and penetration tests, developer training) that reach buffer management and can stop many out-of-bounds accesses from reaching production, but leaves a bounded remainder (e.g. defects that slip past imperfect testing, non-software systems, or outsourced development without full assurance).
A.8.26 explicitly lists resilience against buffer overflow (and SQLi) as one of the application security requirements to identify/address during development or acquisition; well-implemented, this reaches a minority slice of CWE-788 instances (those caught in requirements/risk assessment) but leaves most implementation-level buffer errors untouched.
A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles (defense-in-depth, least privilege, fail securely, distrust external input, hardening, zero-trust verification) plus design reviews against known attack patterns, which can stop buffer overruns from being exploitable in many cases but leaves a bounded remainder (e.g. unsafe legacy code, unsafe third-party libraries, or implementation errors that slip past reviews).
Secure coding standards directly forbid writing or reading past buffer ends.
Security testing in development can detect buffer-overrun defects before release.
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-119, a class-level weakness. Rules are authored against its narrower children: CWE-823.