CVE-2023-20081
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA vulnerability in the IPv6 DHCP (DHCPv6) client module of Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software, Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) Software, Cisco IOS Software, and Cisco IOS XE Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause a denial of service (DoS) condition on an affected device. This vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of DHCPv6 messages. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted DHCPv6 messages to an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause the device to reload, resulting in a DoS condition. Note: To successfully exploit this vulnerability, the attacker would need to either control the DHCPv6 server or be in a man-in-the-middle position.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceThis is a vulnerability in the IPv6 DHCP (DHCPv6) client module of Cisco ASA, FTD, IOS, and IOS XE Software. The vulnerability stems from insufficient validation of DHCPv6 messages, allowing an attacker who controls the DHCPv6 server or occupies a man-in-the-middle position to send crafted DHCPv6 messages that cause the affected device to reload, resulting in denial of service.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 9.8.1= 9.8.1.5= 9.8.1.7= 9.8.2= 9.8.2.8= 9.8.2.14= 9.8.2.15= 9.8.2.17= 9.8.2.20= 9.8.2.24= 9.8.2.26= 9.8.2.28= 9.8.1= 9.8.1.5= 9.8.1.7= 9.8.2= 9.8.2.8= 9.8.2.14= 9.8.2.15= 9.8.2.17= 9.8.2.20= 9.8.2.24= 9.8.2.26= 9.8.2.28= 17.8.1= 17.8.1CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the device product and software versionRun 'show version' or 'show inventory' on the device CLI to determine if it is Cisco ASA, FTD, iOS, or iOS XE and note the exact software version numberAffected if The device runs ASA, FTD, iOS, or iOS XE version 9.8.1 through 9.8.2.28 (ASA/FTD), 17.8.1 (iOS/iOS XE), or another version that matches the affected range listed in the CVE advisory
-
Verify IPv6 is enabled on the deviceRun 'show ipv6 interface brief' or 'show running-config | include ipv6' to check if IPv6 is configuredAffected if IPv6 is enabled and the device software version is in the affected list
-
Confirm DHCPv6 client is configuredRun 'show running-config | include dhcpv6' or check interface configurations with 'show ipv6 dhcp interface' to see if DHCPv6 client requests are enabled on any interfaceAffected if DHCPv6 client is actively requesting or processing DHCPv6 messages on any interface and the software version is affected
-
Check for DHCPv6 server trust statusReview access control lists or IPv6 traffic filters with 'show access-list' or 'show ipv6 traffic' to determine if DHCPv6 traffic is restricted to trusted serversAffected if DHCPv6 traffic is not restricted (no ACL filtering DHCPv6 port 547) and the device is on an accessible network segment where an attacker could inject malicious DHCPv6 messages
The device is affected if it runs a vulnerable ASA, FTD, iOS, or iOS XE version (9.8.1-9.8.2.28 for ASA/FTD, 17.8.1 for iOS/iOS XE) AND has IPv6 with DHCPv6 client enabled, and an attacker could send crafted DHCPv6 messages to trigger the denial of service.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply the relevant Cisco security patches for ASA, FTD, IOS, and IOS XE Software when available. Additionally, restrict DHCPv6 traffic to trusted servers using network access controls and monitor for unexpected DHCPv6 traffic.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,816.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-20081 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-20081 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data