VulnerabilityPublished 20 Jul 2023Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2023-34968: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 · Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data

Affects Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 1.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 70% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 20 Jul 2023
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

Restrict network access to Samba services: Limit exposure by firewalling SMB and RPC ports (typically TCP 445 and 139) to trusted internal networks only.
Disable or restrict the Spotlight protocol if not required, or configure Samba to minimize path disclosure in search results.
Monitor network traffic for unusual RPC requests targeting Samba services to detect potential reconnaissance attempts.
Apply Red Hat security updates promptly once patches addressing CVE-2023-34968 are released.
Employ network segmentation to isolate Samba servers from untrusted or less secure network zones.
Conduct regular audits of Samba configurations to ensure minimal information leakage and adherence to the principle of least privilege.
Educate system administrators about this vulnerability and encourage proactive vulnerability management practices.

Description

A path disclosure vulnerability was found in Samba. As part of the Spotlight protocol, Samba discloses the server-side absolute path of shares, files, and directories in the results for search queries. This flaw allows a malicious client or an attacker with a targeted RPC request to view the information that is part of the disclosed path.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability primarily threatens the confidentiality of internal filesystem structures on affected Samba servers. Organizations that expose Samba services to untrusted networks or have multi-tenant environments could have their internal directory layouts and share configurations disclosed. This information leakage can facilitate reconnaissance activities by attackers, enabling more precise targeting for subsequent attacks such as privilege escalation, lateral movement, or data theft. Critical sectors such as finance, government, healthcare, and telecommunications that rely on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 for file sharing services may face increased risk if Samba is exposed externally or insufficiently segmented internally. Although the vulnerability does not directly impact integrity or availability, the disclosed information can be a stepping stone in a broader attack chain. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the need for proactive mitigation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Nov 2025, 17:45 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats