Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2023-22652· NVD / CVE Program· CNA suse

Stack buffer overflow in "read_file" function

A Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow') vulnerability in openSUSE libeconf leads to DoS via malformed config files. This issue affects libeconf: before 0.5.2.

MediumCVSS 6.5 · v3.1—No exploit Fix available
Published
Jun 1, 2023
Updated
Jun 17, 2026
EPSS
0.6% · 49th percentile
Follow this CVE

Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.

Report tools

JSON

Action score

26

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
26 / 40 · 6.5 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 0.6%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation
proof of concept
Automatable
no
Technical impact
partial

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD
6.5
CNA · suse
3.3
3.2 point gap

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Noroxi analysis

No Noroxi analysis for this record yet

We don't hand-write analysis for the hundreds of thousands of vulnerabilities in the database; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

VendorProduct
opensuselibeconf

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • opensuse libeconfbefore 0.5.2

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (suse). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

  • openSUSE libeconf

    • ? and later · before 0.5.2affected · 0.5.2

Package-level exposure

OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.

EcosystemPackageAffected rangeFix
AlmaLinux:9libeconfbefore 0.4.1-3.el9_20.4.1-3.el9_2
Debian:11libeconfbefore 0.3.8-1+deb11u10.3.8-1+deb11u1
Debian:12libeconfbefore 0.5.1+dfsg1-1+deb12u10.5.1+dfsg1-1+deb12u1
Debian:13libeconfbefore 0.5.2+dfsg1-10.5.2+dfsg1-1
Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::baseoslibeconfbefore 0:0.4.1-3.el9_20:0.4.1-3.el9_2
Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::baseoslibeconf-debuginfobefore 0:0.4.1-3.el9_20:0.4.1-3.el9_2
Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::baseoslibeconf-debugsourcebefore 0:0.4.1-3.el9_20:0.4.1-3.el9_2
Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::baseoslibeconf-utils-debuginfobefore 0:0.4.1-3.el9_20:0.4.1-3.el9_2
Rocky Linux:9libeconfbefore 0:0.4.1-3.el9_20:0.4.1-3.el9_2
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Micro 5.3libeconfbefore 0.5.2-150400.3.6.10.5.2-150400.3.6.1
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Micro 5.3libeconfbefore 0.5.2-150400.3.6.10.5.2-150400.3.6.1
SUSE:Manager Proxy 4.2libeconfbefore 0.5.2-150300.3.11.10.5.2-150300.3.11.1

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2023-32181Stack buffer overflow in "econf_writeFile" function
    26Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

Product / packageFixed versionSource
openSUSE libeconf0.5.2Vendor (CNA)
almalinux:libeconf0.4.1-3.el9_2 · AlmaLinux:9Package registry (OSV)
debian:libeconf0.5.1+dfsg1-1+deb12u1 · Debian:12Package registry (OSV)
opensuse:libeconf0.5.2-150400.3.6.1 · openSUSE:Leap 15.4Package registry (OSV)
red hat:libeconf0:0.4.1-3.el9_2 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::baseosPackage registry (OSV)
red hat:libeconf-debuginfo0:0.4.1-3.el9_2 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::baseosPackage registry (OSV)
red hat:libeconf-debugsource0:0.4.1-3.el9_2 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::baseosPackage registry (OSV)
red hat:libeconf-utils-debuginfo0:0.4.1-3.el9_2 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::baseosPackage registry (OSV)
rocky linux:libeconf0:0.4.1-3.el9_2 · Rocky Linux:9Package registry (OSV)
suse:libeconf0.5.2-150300.3.11.1 · SUSE:Manager Proxy 4.2Package registry (OSV)
suse:libeconf0.5.2-150400.3.6.1 · SUSE:Linux Enterprise Micro 5.3Package registry (OSV)

Exploit status

No known public exploit

No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

No nightly-computed relations.

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
  • No account or password is required.
  • A user must open a link or visit a page.
  • No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality
none
Integrity
none
Availability
high · the service can be disrupted
Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality impact
None
Integrity impact
None
Availability impact
High

CVSS vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

nvd-primary

Root cause

When data is copied, the source length is not compared with the size of the destination buffer. Excess data overwrites adjacent memory.

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

c
char buf[256];memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);

Fixed

c
char buf[256];if (pkt->len > sizeof(buf)) {  return -EINVAL;}memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);

Change log

  1. Fix✗ → ✓

For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →

References

All records