CVE-2023-7250VulnerabilityPublished 18 Mar 2024Updated 6 Nov 2025

CVE-2023-7250: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 · Permissive List of Allowed Inputs

Affects Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 60% 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:N/I:N/A:L

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

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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 18 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 2026-10-26.

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

AI-suggested

Organizations should apply any available patches from Red Hat promptly once released. In the absence of patches, network administrators can implement firewall rules or access control lists to restrict iperf server access to trusted clients only. Configuring iperf servers with strict timeout settings to limit the duration of incomplete sessions can reduce the risk of indefinite hangs. Monitoring iperf server logs and network traffic for unusual patterns or incomplete data transmissions can help detect exploitation attempts early. Additionally, isolating iperf servers in segmented network zones limits the impact of potential denial of service on critical infrastructure. Regularly updating and auditing network testing tools and their configurations will help maintain resilience against similar vulnerabilities.

Description

A flaw was found in iperf, a utility for testing network performance using TCP, UDP, and SCTP. A malicious or malfunctioning client can send less than the expected amount of data to the iperf server, which can cause the server to hang indefinitely waiting for the remainder or until the connection gets closed. This will prevent other connections to the server, leading to a denial of service.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability could disrupt network performance testing and monitoring activities critical for maintaining service quality and troubleshooting. Denial of service on iperf servers may delay detection of network issues or degrade operational efficiency in environments relying on continuous network performance validation. Sectors such as telecommunications, financial services, and critical infrastructure operators that use Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 and iperf for network diagnostics are particularly vulnerable. The impact is limited to availability, with no direct data breach or integrity compromise. However, prolonged denial of service could indirectly affect business continuity and incident response capabilities. Since exploitation requires no authentication and can be performed remotely, attackers could leverage this vulnerability to degrade network testing infrastructure as part of a broader attack strategy or disruption campaign.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 10 Nov 2025, 22:48 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats