Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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-2023-52501 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data Obfuscation (T1001); ranked at the 13th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-57126
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ring-buffer: Do not attempt to read past "commit" When iterating over the ring buffer while the ring buffer is active, the writer can corrupt the reader. There's barriers to help…
more
detect this and handle it, but that code missed the case where the last event was at the very end of the page and has only 4 bytes left. The checks to detect the corruption by the writer to reads needs to see the length of the event. If the length in the first 4 bytes is zero then the length is stored in the second 4 bytes. But if the writer is in the process of updating that code, there's a small window where the length in the first 4 bytes could be zero even though the length is only 4 bytes. That will cause rb_event_length() to read the next 4 bytes which could happen to be off the allocated page. To protect against this, fail immediately if the next event pointer is less than 8 bytes from the end of the commit (last byte of data), as all events must be a minimum of 8 bytes anyway.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation directly finds out-of-bounds read flaws through static analysis, fuzzing, and dynamic bounds checks.
Secure engineering principles require bounds checking and memory-safe constructs that stop out-of-bounds reads from being introduced.
Process isolation confines the effects of an out-of-bounds read to the compromised process.
Input validation rejects malformed indices or lengths that would otherwise cause reads outside buffer bounds.
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.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover instances of out-of-bounds reads after code is deployed.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.
Secure-development practices such as bounds checking and memory-safe languages directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
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.