CVE-2023-6517
Miateknoloji Mia-Med ≤ 1.0.7
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NSummary
CVE-2023-6517 is a high-severity Exposure of Sensitive Information Due to Incompatible Policies (CWE-213) vulnerability in Miateknoloji Mia-Med. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data from Local System (T1005); ranked at the 39th 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-16 (Security and Privacy Attributes) and AC-21 (Information Sharing) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-58748
Vulnerability Data
Exposure of Sensitive Information Due to Incompatible Policies vulnerability in Mia Technology Inc. MİA-MED allows Collect Data as Provided by Users. This issue affects MİA-MED: before 1.0.7.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 4 hardening rules · 4 OS baselines
V4.1.2V14.1.1V16.2.5V16.5.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Associates security and privacy attributes with data and subjects so that incompatible stakeholder policies can be reconciled before exposure occurs.
Requires explicit checking that a sharing partner's authorizations match the sensitivity of the information, preventing release under mismatched policies.
Enforces approved information flow policies between systems, directly stopping exposure when developer and stakeholder policies conflict.
Documents the specific purposes for processing PII, surfacing and aligning conflicting stakeholder policies before data exposure.
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.
Understanding stakeholder needs directly surfaces incompatible sensitivity expectations that produce the exposure.
Establishing risk-management policy based on organizational context is the primary mechanism for aligning divergent sensitivity rules.
Regulatory and privacy obligations often define the conflicting sensitivity views that the weakness fails to reconcile.
Periodic policy review can detect and correct stakeholder-policy mismatches before they cause exposure.
Defining and enforcing access policy is one concrete place where incompatible sensitivity decisions manifest as unauthorized disclosure.
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.
Classification directly addresses mismatched sensitivity views by defining what must be protected.
Legal and contractual requirements often impose stricter sensitivity rules than developer policy.
PII protection explicitly reconciles developer exposure with data-subject or regulator expectations.
High-level policy can mandate consistent handling of sensitive data across stakeholder expectations.
Labelling helps communicate classification decisions and reduce policy conflicts.
Transfer rules can enforce consistent protection when data crosses stakeholder boundaries.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Ubuntu 24.04 (1 rule)
- V-270708 Ubuntu 24.04 LTS must be configured so that remote X connections are disabled, unless to fulfill documented and validated mission requirements. prevents CWE-213
Windows Server 2019 (1 rule)
- V-205757 Windows Server 2019 Debug programs: user right must only be assigned to the Administrators group. prevents CWE-213