Cyber Resilience

CVE-2023-2977

Memory Safety in Redhat Enterprise Linux 8.0 … 9.0

Published
01 June 2023
Modified
03 November 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.1
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:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0029 22th percentile
Risk Priority 55 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2023-2977 is a high-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Redhat Enterprise Linux. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).

Operationally, ranked at the 22th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A vulnerbility was found in OpenSC. This security flaw cause a buffer overrun vulnerability in pkcs15 cardos_have_verifyrc_package. The attacker can supply a smart card package with malformed ASN1 context. The cardos_have_verifyrc_package function scans the ASN1 buffer for 2 tags, where…

more

remaining length is wrongly caculated due to moved starting pointer. This leads to possible heap-based buffer oob read. In cases where ASAN is enabled while compiling this causes a crash. Further info leak or more damage is possible.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-40661Same product: Opensc Project Opensc
CVE-2023-4535Same product: Opensc Project Opensc
CVE-2023-6121Same product: Redhat Enterprise Linux
CVE-2023-4693Same product: Redhat Enterprise Linux
CVE-2024-50074Same product: Redhat Enterprise Linux
CVE-2023-6610Same product: Redhat Enterprise Linux
CVE-2024-6505Same product: Redhat Enterprise Linux
CVE-2023-40549Same product: Redhat Enterprise Linux
CVE-2023-40550Same product: Redhat Enterprise Linux
CVE-2023-40551Same product: Redhat Enterprise Linux

Affected Assets

opensc project
opensc
0.23.0
redhat
enterprise linux
8.0, 9.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V17.3.2

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-119

Ongoing control assessments and code testing (static/dynamic analysis, fuzzing) surface memory buffer restriction failures, which are then remediated before release.

addresses: CWE-119

Managed runtimes used by platform-independent applications (e.g., JVM, CLR) enforce memory safety, preventing most buffer overflows that require direct memory manipulation.

addresses: CWE-119

Memory protections (e.g., W^X, ASLR) make exploitation of buffer-boundary violations far harder to turn into code execution.

addresses: CWE-119

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.

ID.RA-08 partial match
prevents

Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.

PR.AT-02 partial match
prevents

Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.

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.

detects

Security testing in development catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.

A.8.15 Logging partial match
detects

Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.

prevents

Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.

prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.

References