CVE-2023-39914
Nlnetlabs Bcder ≤ 0.7.3
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-2023-39914 is a high-severity Improper Handling of Undefined Values (CWE-232) vulnerability in Nlnetlabs Bcder. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data Obfuscation (T1001); ranked in the top 48% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-2446
Vulnerability Data
NLnet Labs' bcder library up to and including version 0.7.2 panics while decoding certain invalid input data rather than rejecting the data with an error. This can affect both the actual decoding stage as well as accessing content of types…
more
that utilized delayed decoding.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
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.
Integrity protections for data-at-rest commonly include structural consistency checks that prevent or detect the described weakness.
Integrity protections for data-in-transit commonly include structural consistency checks that prevent or detect the described weakness.
Integrity protections for data-in-use commonly include structural consistency checks that prevent or detect the described weakness.
Secure SDLC practices directly require proper input validation and error handling for undefined values.
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.
Secure development life cycle requires handling of invalid/undefined inputs during design and coding.
A.8.26 only requires that security requirements (including resilience against injections or input validation) be identified and specified during development or acquisition; it does not itself enforce, implement or prevent the undefined-value handling flaw from being introduced or exploited.
A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles (e.g. least privilege, fail securely, distrust external input, security-oriented design reviews) that reach some but not most instances of mishandling undefined values; the weakness can still be introduced in code that follows the principles but is incomplete on parameter validation or state handling.
Secure coding standards directly require defensive checks for undefined or unsupported parameter values.
Security testing in development can detect missing handling of undefined values before release.