Cyber Resilience

CVE-2023-50232

Inductiveautomation Ignition 8.1.0 – 8.1.33

Published
03 May 2024
Modified
12 March 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 8.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.014 70th percentile
Risk Priority 68 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2023-50232 is a high-severity Argument Injection (CWE-88) vulnerability in Inductiveautomation Ignition. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 30% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Inductive Automation Ignition getParams Argument Injection Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Inductive Automation Ignition. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must connect…

more

to a malicious server. The specific flaw exists within the getParams method. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of a user-supplied string before using it to prepare an argument for a system call. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current user. Was ZDI-CAN-22028.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1059 Command and Scripting Interpreter Execution
Adversaries may abuse command and script interpreters to execute commands, scripts, or binaries.
T1059.001 PowerShell Execution
Adversaries may abuse PowerShell commands and scripts for execution.
T1059.003 Windows Command Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse the Windows command shell for execution.
T1059.004 Unix Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse Unix shell commands and scripts for execution.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-50218Same product: Inductiveautomation Ignition
CVE-2023-38123Same product: Inductiveautomation Ignition
CVE-2025-13913Same product: Inductiveautomation Ignition
CVE-2023-50220Same product: Inductiveautomation Ignition
CVE-2023-50219Same product: Inductiveautomation Ignition
CVE-2023-39477Same product: Inductiveautomation Ignition
CVE-2023-50233Same product: Inductiveautomation Ignition
CVE-2023-39475Same product: Inductiveautomation Ignition
CVE-2023-39472Same product: Inductiveautomation Ignition
CVE-2023-39473Same product: Inductiveautomation Ignition

Affected Assets

inductiveautomation
ignition
8.1.0 — 8.1.33

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)
  • V1.2.5

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing can discover argument-injection flaws in command-construction code but does not stop their introduction.

Input validation directly stops construction of command strings containing unneutralized delimiters or injected arguments.

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 directly require proper input validation and command construction to prevent argument injection.

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.

finds

Security testing can detect argument injection but does not prevent it at the source.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent argument injection.

prevents

Application security requirements include explicit rules for safe command-line argument handling and escaping.

prevents

Secure architecture principles discourage unsafe command invocation patterns and favor safer APIs.

prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly require proper neutralization of command arguments, directly eliminating CWE-88.

none

Change management can catch unsafe command patterns during reviews but is not a direct mitigation.

References