CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
HIGH

CVE-2023-25567

CVE-2023-25567 — GSS-NTLMSSP vulnerable to out-of-bounds read when decoding target information

GSS-NTLMSSP, a mechglue plugin for the GSSAPI library that implements NTLM authentication, has an out-of-bounds read when decoding target information prior to version 1.2.0. The length of the `av_pair` is not checked properly for two of the elements which can trigger an out-of-bound read. The out-of-bounds read can be triggered via the main `gss_accept_sec_context` entry point and could cause a denial-of-service if the memory is unmapped. The issue is fixed in version 1.2.0.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, GitHub_M

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

1%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

gssapi

gss_ntlmssp

CVSS base

7.5

HIGH

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

Yes

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

gssapi

Products (1)

gss ntlmssp

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
7.5CVSS 3.1HIGH——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-125

References

3 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

  • gssapievery CVE for this vendor
  • CWE-125other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.