CVE-2023-30591
Nodebb ≤ 2.8.10
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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-2023-30591 is a high-severity Improper Handling of Unexpected Data Type (CWE-241) vulnerability in Nodebb Nodebb. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Steganography (T1001.002); ranked in the top 0.9% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-34971
Vulnerability Data
Denial-of-service in NodeBB <= v2.8.10 allows unauthenticated attackers to trigger a crash, when invoking `eventName.startsWith()` or `eventName.toString()`, while processing Socket.IO messages via crafted Socket.IO messages containing array or object type for the event name respectively.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
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.
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 proper input validation and type checking to prevent this weakness.
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 (secure coding guidelines, security requirements, checkpoints, testing, developer training) that reach a minority slice of CWE-241 instances (those introduced via missing type checks in first-party code) but leave most production defects untouched when practices are not exhaustive.
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.