Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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-2026-97230 is a critical-severity Embedded Malicious Code (CWE-506) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Embedded Payloads (T1027.009); 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 SC-44 (Detonation Chambers) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-86479
Vulnerability Data
IO::Socket::SSL::SelfCertificate versions 1.00 for Perl contains malware which executes Python code from an obfuscated URL. The generate_certificate runs a Python script saved as a certificate file. The pyhton script attempts to retrieve code from a hardcoded http URL that is…
more
obfuscated with base64 encoding and run the response body directly. The impact is that arbitrary code can be invoked as the user, without a dropped script being saved on the affected host. The releases have no test scripts nor build hooks. The intention may have been to trigger the payload after installation. The dropper script is in lib/Crypt/SelfCertificate/sample/cert.pem. This is similar to CVE-2026-95831 for the module Crypt::SelfCertificate. The SHA-256 digests of the files are ba24ee8ec3b7f47f65bed62e16fb413ace50653cf44bd8ea90914390922831e0 IO-Socket-SSL-SelfCertificate-1.00.tar.gz 821d38830e5eb8607738421c25ac25f59fff02a6ab67daa32fbd020429454dac IO-Socket-SSL-SelfCertificate-1.00/lib/IO/Socket/SSL/SelfCertificate/sample/cert.pem d483cb7b23b7271cb11cf242bff4a2e1c02df0b9525eb0429abeea8961c399d5 IO-Socket-SSL-SelfCertificate-1.00-upload.tar.gz
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 3 hardening rules · 2 OS baselines
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover embedded malicious code before release.
Detonation chambers can reveal embedded malicious code through controlled execution analysis.
Integrity verification tools directly detect unauthorized or malicious code insertions.
Component authenticity controls stop introduction of malicious or counterfeit code into the product.
Tamper-resistance and detection mechanisms identify malicious code introduced via the supply chain.
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.
Due diligence prior to supplier relationships helps avoid sources of embedded malicious code.
Supplier risk assessment reduces likelihood of receiving products containing malicious code.
Assessing authenticity and integrity before acquisition catches embedded malicious code.
Pre-acquisition assessment of critical suppliers mitigates risk of malicious code in procured software.
Secure SDLC practices directly prevent introduction of malicious code during development.
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.
Requiring suppliers to furnish component lists, attestations, and cryptographic verification of delivered artefacts makes it harder for an attacker to embed hidden malicious code that would otherwise go undetected through the supply chain.
Checks that executed code has not been tampered with and monitoring for malware-associated activity reduce the likelihood that hidden malicious code remains active.
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` (higher-evidence rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
- V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-506
RHEL 9 (1 rule)
- V-258078 RHEL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-506