CVE-2023-5978: Incorrect libcap_net limitation list manipulation
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 30/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.51% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: FreeBSD FreeBSD p5.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to FreeBSD FreeBSD p5 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
In versions of FreeBSD 13-RELEASE before 13-RELEASE-p5, under certain circumstances the cap_net libcasper(3) service incorrectly validates that updated constraints are strictly subsets of the active constraints. When only a list of resolvable domain names was specified without setting any other limitations, an application could submit a new list of domains including include entries not previously listed. This could permit the application to resolve domain names that were previously restricted.
- Published
- Nov 8, 2023
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.5% · 43th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-269
Report tools
Action score
30
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 30 / 40 · 7.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.5%
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| freebsd | freebsd | cpe:2.3:o:freebsd:freebsd |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- freebsd freebsd13.0 and later · before 13.2
- freebsd freebsd13.2
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (freebsd). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
FreeBSD FreeBSD
- 13.2-RELEASE and later · before p5affected · release
Same product
freebsd: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2020-7457In FreeBSD 12.1-STABLE before r359565, 12.1-RELEASE before p7, 11.4-STABLE before r362975, 11.4-RELEASE before p1, and 11.3-RELEASE before p60This week
- CVE-2006-0900nfsd in FreeBSD 6.0 kernel allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted NFS mount request, as demonstrated by the Prot51Plan
- CVE-2018-17157In FreeBSD before 11.2-STABLE(r340854) and 11.2-RELEASE-p5, an integer overflow error when handling opcodes can cause memory corruption by s46Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2023-5370Oct 4, 2023 · arm64 boot CPUs may lack speculative execution protections22Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2023-5941Nov 8, 2023 · libc stdio buffer overflow39Monitor
- Later →CVE-2023-6534Dec 13, 2023 · TCP spoofing vulnerability in pf(4)30Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| FreeBSD FreeBSD | p5 | Vendor (CNA) |
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.
No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).
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.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- Shawn Webbfinder
- Mariusz Zaborskifinder
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.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- none
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- none
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-269 · Improper Privilege ManagementCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
nvd-primary
Root cause
To simplify setup, a service account is granted broad, cluster-wide permissions. The principle of least privilege is skipped during installation.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-269 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
kind: ClusterRole
rules:
- apiGroups: ["*"]
resources: ["*"]
verbs: ["*"]Fixed
kind: Role
metadata:
namespace: lodos-system
rules:
- apiGroups: ["apps"]
resources: ["deployments"]
verbs: ["get", "list", "update"]Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (1 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.