VulnerabilityPublished 23 Dec 2023Updated 6 Nov 2025

CVE-2023-7008: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 · Channel Accessible by Non-Endpoint

Affects Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.8% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 57% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
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: 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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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 23 Dec 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

Apply official patches from Red Hat as soon as they become available to address CVE-2023-7008.
Until patches are deployed, configure systemd-resolved to enforce strict DNSSEC validation policies, rejecting unsigned or improperly signed DNSSEC records.
Monitor DNS traffic for unusual patterns or unexpected DNS responses that could indicate manipulation attempts.
Employ network segmentation and firewall rules to limit exposure of DNS services to untrusted networks.
Use alternative DNS resolvers with robust DNSSEC validation as a temporary workaround if feasible.
Regularly audit and update systemd and related components to maintain security posture.
Educate network and security teams about the risks of DNS manipulation and the importance of DNSSEC validation integrity.
Implement intrusion detection systems capable of detecting DNS spoofing or man-in-the-middle activities. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on DNSSEC-specific configurations and monitoring tailored to this vulnerability.

Description

A vulnerability was found in systemd-resolved. This issue may allow systemd-resolved to accept records of DNSSEC-signed domains even when they have no signature, allowing man-in-the-middles (or the upstream DNS resolver) to manipulate records.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk to the integrity of DNS resolution processes, particularly for those relying on DNSSEC to secure domain name lookups. Manipulated DNS responses can lead to traffic redirection, phishing, or interception of sensitive communications, undermining trust in network communications. Critical sectors such as finance, government, healthcare, and telecommunications that depend on RHEL 8 and DNSSEC for secure operations could face targeted attacks exploiting this flaw. Although confidentiality and availability are not directly impacted, the integrity compromise can facilitate further attacks or data breaches. The medium severity rating reflects that exploitation is not trivial due to high attack complexity, but the absence of required privileges or user interaction means that attackers with network access could exploit this vulnerability. European organizations with exposed DNS infrastructure or those using RHEL 8 in cloud or on-premises environments should consider this a significant threat to their DNS security posture.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Nov 2025, 03:05 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats