Security Resilience

CVE-2023-24021

Trustwave Modsecurity ≤ 2.9.7

Published
20 January 2023
Modified
02 April 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0091 59th percentile
Risk Priority 59 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2023-24021 is a high-severity Improper Null Termination (CWE-170) vulnerability in Trustwave Modsecurity. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data Obfuscation (T1001); ranked in the top 41% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Incorrect handling of '\0' bytes in file uploads in ModSecurity before 2.9.7 may allow for Web Application Firewall bypasses and buffer over-reads on the Web Application Firewall when executing rules that read the FILES_TMP_CONTENT collection.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1001 Data Obfuscation Command And Control
Adversaries may obfuscate command and control traffic to make it more difficult to detect.
T1001.001 Junk Data Command And Control
Adversaries may add junk data to protocols used for command and control to make detection more difficult.
T1001.002 Steganography Command And Control
Adversaries may use steganographic techniques to hide command and control traffic to make detection efforts more difficult.
T1003.003 NTDS Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to access or create a copy of the Active Directory domain database in order to steal credential information, as well as obtain other information about domain members such as devices, users, and access rights.
T1003.005 Cached Domain Credentials Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to access cached domain credentials used to allow authentication to occur in the event a domain controller is unavailable.
T1008 Fallback Channels Command And Control
Adversaries may use fallback or alternate communication channels if the primary channel is compromised or inaccessible in order to maintain reliable command and control and to avoid data transfer thresholds.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-46292Same product: Trustwave Modsecurity
CVE-2023-4207Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2025-22040Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-26804Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-26766Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2025-38236Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-35823Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-26895Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2026-34757Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2025-38350Same product: Debian Debian Linux

Affected Assets

trustwave
modsecurity
≤ 2.9.7
debian
debian linux
10.0

Mitigating Controls

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.

PR.PS-06 partial match
blocks

Secure SDLC practices directly enforce correct string/array termination via coding standards, reviews, and static analysis.

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.

blocks

A.8.25 mandates secure SDLC practices including secure coding guidelines, developer training, security testing and checkpoints that reach improper null termination as a coding defect, but leaves a bounded remainder (e.g. outsourced development without full assurance, inconsistent application of guidelines across languages or legacy code, and defects that slip past testing per the SA-3 vs CWE-89 precedent).

blocks

A.8.26 requires identifying and specifying security requirements (including resilience against SQL injection or buffer overflows) but does not itself implement any mechanism that stops null-termination errors from being introduced or exploited; the weakness can still be present and exploitable.

removes

A.8.27 mandates establishing and applying secure engineering principles (including secure coding, hardening, and design review) but does not itself remove existing instances of null-termination defects already present in code; per the verb definition and anchors, testing finds while only direct code change removes, and this clause reaches neither first-party code defects nor the removal act

prevents

Secure coding standards directly require correct null termination of strings and arrays.

finds

Security testing in development can detect missing or incorrect null terminators before release.

References