CVE-2023-53511
Linux Kernel 5.17.9 – 5.18
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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-2023-53511 is a medium-severity Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime (CWE-401) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Junk Data (T1001.001); ranked at the 3th 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-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-32741
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: io_uring: fix fget leak when fs don't support nowait buffered read Heming reported a BUG when using io_uring doing link-cp on ocfs2. [1] Do the following steps can reproduce this…
more
BUG: mount -t ocfs2 /dev/vdc /mnt/ocfs2 cp testfile /mnt/ocfs2/ ./link-cp /mnt/ocfs2/testfile /mnt/ocfs2/testfile.1 umount /mnt/ocfs2 Then umount will fail, and it outputs: umount: /mnt/ocfs2: target is busy. While tracing umount, it blames mnt_get_count() not return as expected. Do a deep investigation for fget()/fput() on related code flow, I've finally found that fget() leaks since ocfs2 doesn't support nowait buffered read. io_issue_sqe |-io_assign_file // do fget() first |-io_read |-io_iter_do_read |-ocfs2_file_read_iter // return -EOPNOTSUPP |-kiocb_done |-io_rw_done |-__io_complete_rw_common // set REQ_F_REISSUE |-io_resubmit_prep |-io_req_prep_async // override req->file, leak happens This was introduced by commit a196c78b5443 in v5.18. Fix it by don't re-assign req->file if it has already been assigned. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/ocfs2-devel/ab580a75-91c8-d68a-3455-40361be1bfa8@linux.alibaba.com/T/#t
- 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 (static analysis, fuzzing, or runtime leak detection) directly finds missing deallocation.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate memory-management disciplines that avoid leaks at introduction.
Engineering principles applied during development can require explicit resource-release patterns that stop memory leaks from being coded.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly enforce proper memory allocation/deallocation via coding standards, reviews, and tooling.
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.