VulnerabilityPublished 27 Mar 2024Updated 4 Nov 2025

CVE-2023-45919: Mesa · Buffer Over-read

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 32% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 27 Mar 2024
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

2) Restrict local access to systems running Mesa, especially limiting untrusted users from interacting with the X server or graphical sessions. 3) Employ access control mechanisms such as SELinux or AppArmor profiles to confine graphical applications and reduce the attack surface. 4) Consider disabling or limiting GLX extensions if not required in the environment. 5) Educate users on the risks of interacting with untrusted graphical servers or environments. 6) Use system-level monitoring to detect unusual graphical subsystem behavior or crashes that could indicate exploitation attempts. 7) For critical environments, consider using alternative graphics stacks or versions not affected by this vulnerability until patches are available.

Description

Mesa 23.0.4 was discovered to contain a buffer over-read in glXQueryServerString(). NOTE: this is disputed because there are no common situations in which users require uninterrupted operation with an attacker-controller server.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2023-45919 is moderate but context-dependent. Organizations relying on Linux workstations or servers running Mesa 23.0.4 or similar versions with GLX support could face risks if local users or attackers can manipulate the graphical environment. Confidentiality could be compromised through memory disclosure, and integrity or availability might be affected by application crashes or instability. However, the requirement for local access and user interaction limits remote exploitation and large-scale impact. Sectors with high Linux desktop adoption, such as research institutions, software development firms, and certain government agencies, may be more exposed. The vulnerability is less critical for server environments without graphical interfaces or where access controls prevent untrusted local users. Overall, the threat is moderate and situational but should not be ignored in sensitive or multi-user environments.

Summary

CVE-2023-45919 identifies a buffer over-read vulnerability in the Mesa 3D Graphics Library version 23.0.4, specifically within the glXQueryServerString() function. This function is part of the GLX extension used to interface OpenGL with the X Window System, commonly found on Linux and Unix-like operating systems. The vulnerability (classified under CWE-126) arises when the function reads beyond the allocated buffer boundaries, potentially leaking memory contents or causing application instability. The CVSS 3.1 base score is 5.3 (medium), reflecting that exploitation requires local access (AV:L), low attack complexity (AC:L), no privileges required (PR:N), but user interaction is necessary (UI:R). The scope remains unchanged (S:U), and the impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability is limited (C:L/I:L/A:L). The vulnerability is disputed because typical users do not operate with an attacker-controlled X server, which reduces practical exploitation scenarios. No patches or exploits are currently reported, but the risk exists primarily in environments where untrusted users can influence the X server or graphical subsystem. This vulnerability could lead to information disclosure or minor denial of service conditions if exploited.

CWE-126Buffer Over-read (opens in a new tab)
Variant weakness
The product reads from a buffer using buffer access mechanisms such as indexes or pointers that reference memory locations after the targeted buffer.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Nov 2025, 18:55 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-126

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats