Security Resilience

CVE-2023-53192

Linux Kernel 5.8 – 5.10.190

Published
15 September 2025
Modified
04 August 2026
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 9.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0039 31th percentile
Risk Priority 71 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2023-53192 is a critical-severity Improper Validation of Array Index (CWE-129) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Steganography (T1001.002); ranked at the 31th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A05:2025 Injection

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: vxlan: Fix nexthop hash size The nexthop code expects a 31 bit hash, such as what is returned by fib_multipath_hash() and rt6_multipath_hash(). Passing the 32 bit hash returned by skb_get_hash()…

more

can lead to problems related to the fact that 'int hash' is a negative number when the MSB is set. In the case of hash threshold nexthop groups, nexthop_select_path_hthr() will disproportionately select the first nexthop group entry. In the case of resilient nexthop groups, nexthop_select_path_res() may do an out of bounds access in nh_buckets[], for example: hash = -912054133 num_nh_buckets = 2 bucket_index = 65535 which leads to the following panic: BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: ffffc900025910c8 PGD 100000067 P4D 100000067 PUD 10026b067 PMD 0 Oops: 0002 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN NOPTI CPU: 4 PID: 856 Comm: kworker/4:3 Not tainted 6.5.0-rc2+ #34 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.2-debian-1.16.2-1 04/01/2014 Workqueue: ipv6_addrconf addrconf_dad_work RIP: 0010:nexthop_select_path+0x197/0xbf0 Code: c1 e4 05 be 08 00 00 00 4c 8b 35 a4 14 7e 01 4e 8d 6c 25 00 4a 8d 7c 25 08 48 01 dd e8 c2 25 15 ff 49 8d 7d 08 e8 39 13 15 ff <4d> 89 75 08 48 89 ef e8 7d 12 15 ff 48 8b 5d 00 e8 14 55 2f 00 85 RSP: 0018:ffff88810c36f260 EFLAGS: 00010246 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 00000000002000c0 RCX: ffffffffaf02dd77 RDX: dffffc0000000000 RSI: 0000000000000008 RDI: ffffc900025910c8 RBP: ffffc900025910c0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: fffff520004b2219 R10: ffffc900025910cf R11: 31392d2068736168 R12: 00000000002000c0 R13: ffffc900025910c0 R14: 00000000fffef608 R15: ffff88811840e900 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8881f7000000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: ffffc900025910c8 CR3: 0000000129d00000 CR4: 0000000000750ee0 PKRU: 55555554 Call Trace: <TASK> ? __die+0x23/0x70 ? page_fault_oops+0x1ee/0x5c0 ? __pfx_is_prefetch.constprop.0+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_page_fault_oops+0x10/0x10 ? search_bpf_extables+0xfe/0x1c0 ? fixup_exception+0x3b/0x470 ? exc_page_fault+0xf6/0x110 ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30 ? nexthop_select_path+0x197/0xbf0 ? nexthop_select_path+0x197/0xbf0 ? lock_is_held_type+0xe7/0x140 vxlan_xmit+0x5b2/0x2340 ? __lock_acquire+0x92b/0x3370 ? __pfx_vxlan_xmit+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx___lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_register_lock_class+0x10/0x10 ? skb_network_protocol+0xce/0x2d0 ? dev_hard_start_xmit+0xca/0x350 ? __pfx_vxlan_xmit+0x10/0x10 dev_hard_start_xmit+0xca/0x350 __dev_queue_xmit+0x513/0x1e20 ? __pfx___dev_queue_xmit+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_lock_release+0x10/0x10 ? mark_held_locks+0x44/0x90 ? skb_push+0x4c/0x80 ? eth_header+0x81/0xe0 ? __pfx_eth_header+0x10/0x10 ? neigh_resolve_output+0x215/0x310 ? ip6_finish_output2+0x2ba/0xc90 ip6_finish_output2+0x2ba/0xc90 ? lock_release+0x236/0x3e0 ? ip6_mtu+0xbb/0x240 ? __pfx_ip6_finish_output2+0x10/0x10 ? find_held_lock+0x83/0xa0 ? lock_is_held_type+0xe7/0x140 ip6_finish_output+0x1ee/0x780 ip6_output+0x138/0x460 ? __pfx_ip6_output+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx___lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_ip6_finish_output+0x10/0x10 NF_HOOK.constprop.0+0xc0/0x420 ? __pfx_NF_HOOK.constprop.0+0x10/0x10 ? ndisc_send_skb+0x2c0/0x960 ? __pfx_lock_release+0x10/0x10 ? __local_bh_enable_ip+0x93/0x110 ? lock_is_held_type+0xe7/0x140 ndisc_send_skb+0x4be/0x960 ? __pfx_ndisc_send_skb+0x10/0x10 ? mark_held_locks+0x65/0x90 ? find_held_lock+0x83/0xa0 ndisc_send_ns+0xb0/0x110 ? __pfx_ndisc_send_ns+0x10/0x10 addrconf_dad_work+0x631/0x8e0 ? lock_acquire+0x180/0x3f0 ? __pfx_addrconf_dad_work+0x10/0x10 ? mark_held_locks+0x24/0x90 process_one_work+0x582/0x9c0 ? __pfx_process_one_work+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_do_raw_spin_lock+0x10/0x10 ? mark_held_locks+0x24/0x90 worker_thread+0x93/0x630 ? __kthread_parkme+0xdc/0x100 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0x1a5/0x1e0 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x34/0x60 ---truncated---

CWE(s)
CWE-129

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1001.002 Steganography Command And Control
Adversaries may use steganographic techniques to hide command and control traffic to make detection efforts more difficult.
attack.mitre.org →
T1001.003 Protocol or Service Impersonation Command And Control
Adversaries may impersonate legitimate protocols or web service traffic to disguise command and control activity and thwart analysis efforts.
attack.mitre.org →
T1003.002 Security Account Manager Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to extract credential material from the Security Account Manager (SAM) database either through in-memory techniques or through the Windows Registry where the SAM database is stored.
attack.mitre.org →
T1003.003 NTDS Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to access or create a copy of the Active Directory domain database in order to steal credential information, as well as obtain other information about domain members such as devices, users, and access rights.
attack.mitre.org →
T1003.008 /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to dump the contents of <code>/etc/passwd</code> and <code>/etc/shadow</code> to enable offline password cracking.
attack.mitre.org →
T1008 Fallback Channels Command And Control
Adversaries may use fallback or alternate communication channels if the primary channel is compromised or inaccessible in order to maintain reliable command and control and to avoid data transfer thresholds.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-26971Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-43842Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2025-21692Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-42120Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-26967Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-52594Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2025-21991Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-52987Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-46836Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-41061Same product: Linux Linux Kernel

Affected Assets

linux
linux kernel
6.5 · 5.8 — 5.10.190 · 5.11 — 5.15.126 · 5.16 — 6.1.45

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.

PR.PS-06 partial match
blocks

Secure SDLC practices directly require input validation and bounds checking that prevent improper array indexing.

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.5.14 Information transfer partial match
removes
A.5.15 Access control partial match
removes
A.5.16 Identity management partial match
removes
A.5.17 Authentication information partial match
removes
A.5.18 Access rights partial match
removes
A.8.10 Information deletion partial match
removes

References