VulnerabilityPublished 25 Aug 2023Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2023-38201: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 · Insecure Direct Object Reference

Affects Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 to 9.0.0 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 41% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 9.0.0

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 25 Aug 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 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

Upgrade keylime/keylime to 9.0.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubkeylime/keylime`pkg:github/keylime/keylime`Other threats	Affected <9.0.0	Fixed in 9.0.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2023-38201, organizations should: 1) Immediately apply any available patches or updates from Red Hat addressing this vulnerability once released. 2) Review and tighten the process for adding agents to the verifier list, ensuring only fully authenticated and authorized agents are registered. 3) Implement additional validation mechanisms beyond user-controlled keys, such as multi-factor authentication or cryptographic verification of agent identities. 4) Monitor Keylime registrar logs and agent registration events for anomalies or unexpected agent additions. 5) Conduct regular audits of the verifier list and attestation results to detect inconsistencies or suspicious entries. 6) Segment network access to the Keylime registrar to limit exposure to potentially malicious actors. 7) Educate administrators on the risks of blindly trusting user-controlled keys and enforce strict operational security policies around agent management. These steps go beyond generic patching advice by focusing on operational controls and validation enhancements to prevent exploitation.

Description

A flaw was found in the Keylime registrar that could allow a bypass of the challenge-response protocol during agent registration. This issue may allow an attacker to impersonate an agent and hide the true status of a monitored machine if the fake agent is added to the verifier list by a legitimate user, resulting in a breach of the integrity of the registrar database.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those in critical infrastructure sectors such as energy, finance, and government, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to the integrity of system monitoring and attestation processes. If exploited, attackers could mask compromised or tampered systems by impersonating legitimate agents, leading to false assurances about system health and security posture. This could delay detection of breaches or unauthorized changes, increasing the window for attackers to operate undetected. Since the vulnerability does not affect confidentiality or availability, data leakage or service disruption is unlikely directly from this flaw. However, the integrity compromise can indirectly facilitate further attacks or persistent threats. Organizations relying on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 with Keylime for remote attestation should consider this a critical trust boundary issue that could undermine compliance with regulatory requirements related to system integrity and auditability.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Nov 2025, 18:07 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats