Security Resilience

CVE-2023-25590

LPE in Arubanetworks Clearpass Policy Manager 6.9.0 – 6.9.13

Published
22 March 2023
Modified
27 February 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0018 7th percentile
Risk Priority 55 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-2023-25590 is a high-severity Improper Privilege Management (CWE-269) vulnerability in Arubanetworks Clearpass Policy Manager. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).

Operationally, ranked at the 7th 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

Vulnerability Data

A vulnerability in the ClearPass OnGuard Linux agent could allow malicious users on a Linux instance to elevate their user privileges to those of a higher role. A successful exploit allows malicious users to execute arbitrary code with root level…

more

privileges on the Linux instance.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-43506Same product: Arubanetworks Clearpass Policy Manager
CVE-2026-17744Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-46810Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2026-17877Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2026-46333Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2025-12381Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2026-102490Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2026-12878Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-5847Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-52791Same product: Linux Linux Kernel

Affected Assets

arubanetworks
clearpass policy manager
6.11.0, 6.11.1 · 6.9.0 — 6.9.13 · 6.10.0 — 6.10.8

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.

addresses: CWE-269

Policy addresses roles, responsibilities, and privilege management to prevent improper privilege assignments.

addresses: CWE-269

Access supervision ensures privileges are assigned and managed without improper escalation or retention.

addresses: CWE-269

Assigning group/role memberships and access authorizations (privileges) while reviewing accounts addresses improper privilege management.

addresses: CWE-269

Enforces proper privilege management by requiring all decisions through the verified reference monitor.

addresses: CWE-269

By mandating division of duties across roles, the control enforces proper privilege management and prevents a single entity from controlling an entire sensitive process.

addresses: CWE-269

Implements core proper privilege management by restricting to only required rights.

addresses: CWE-269

Policy requires training on privilege management and least privilege, making it harder to exploit improper privilege management weaknesses.

addresses: CWE-269

Training covers proper privilege management practices, making incorrect privilege assignments less likely.

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.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).

blocks

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)

blocks

Defining and communicating authorization levels for each role limits the assignment of excessive or unnecessary privileges.

A.8.15 Logging partial match
finds

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.

blocks

A.8.2 directly controls the identification, allocation, review, expiry, temporary use, and separation of privileged rights per policy, which prevents most improper privilege management (CWE-269) by design; the bounded remainder is flawed tracking/checking logic inside the product's own enforcement code (the AC-3 slice of 269).

blocks

A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles including least privilege, default deny, fail securely, defence in depth, security architecture integration, hardening, and zero-trust verification of every request; these directly stop most improper privilege spheres from being exploitable even if the assignment flaw remains, with a bounded remainder (e.g. certain legacy or safety-overridden controls).

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.

References