CVE-2023-50327
Ibm Powersc 1.3 … 2.1
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:NCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2023-50327 is a medium-severity Trusting HTTP Permission Methods on the Server Side (CWE-650) vulnerability in Ibm Powersc. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data Obfuscation (T1001); ranked at the 41th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-55132
Vulnerability Data
IBM PowerSC 1.3, 2.0, and 2.1 uses insecure HTTP methods which could allow a remote attacker to perform unauthorized file request modification. IBM X-Force ID: 275109.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V3.5.1V3.5.3V4.1.4
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
AC-3 enforces authorizations for resource access without permitting unsafe assumptions about request methods to bypass checks.
Developer testing and evaluation can discover cases where two products interpret the same inputs or state transitions differently.
Strict, consistently applied input validation reduces the chance that one product will accept data the other product rejects or interprets differently.
Applying security engineering principles during design can require unambiguous protocol and data-format specifications that eliminate divergent interpretations between products.
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.
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.
A.8.25 mandates a secure SDLC process with checkpoints, secure coding, testing and training; it does not stop differing interpretations of shared state or inputs between two products from arising or being exploited
Application security requirements can mandate proper HTTP method usage and state-changing operation restrictions.
Secure system architecture principles include proper HTTP method handling and RESTful design to prevent state changes via GET.
Secure coding practices directly address improper HTTP method usage and ensure state-changing operations use POST/PUT/DELETE.
Security testing can detect and prevent vulnerabilities where GET requests cause unintended state changes.
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-436, a class-level weakness, and none of its children carries one either.