CVE-2023-2156
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 flaw was found in the networking subsystem of the Linux kernel within the handling of the RPL protocol. This issue results from the lack of proper handling of user-supplied data, which can lead to an assertion failure. This may allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to create a denial of service condition on the system.
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 confidenceA vulnerability exists in the Linux kernel's networking subsystem in the RPL (Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks) protocol handling. The flaw stems from improper validation of user-supplied data, which can trigger an assertion failure and cause a denial of service. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this without authentication.
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>= 5.7, < 5.10.184>= 5.11, < 5.15.117>= 5.16, < 6.1.34>= 6.2, < 6.2.13>= 6.3, < 6.3.8= 9.0= 38= 10.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/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.
-
Check kernel versionRun `uname -r` or `cat /proc/version` to get the installed kernel versionAffected if The version falls within any of these ranges: >= 5.7 and < 5.10.184; >= 5.11 and < 5.15.117; >= 5.16 and < 6.1.34; >= 6.2 and < 6.2.13; >= 6.3 and < 6.3.8
-
Verify RPL kernel module is loadedRun `lsmod | grep -i rpl` to see if the RPL module is currently loaded into the kernelAffected if The rpl module appears in the output, indicating RPL protocol support is active
-
Check RPL sysctl configurationRun `sysctl -a 2>/dev/null | grep -i rpl` to inspect RPL-related kernel parametersAffected if Any RPL-related sysctl parameters exist and are configured (non-zero or non-default values), indicating RPL is enabled
-
Check for RPL interface configurationRun `ip -6 route show` and look for rpl entries, or check `cat /proc/net/ipv6_route` for rpl-related routesAffected if RPL-specific routes or interfaces appear in the IPv6 routing table, confirming active RPL protocol usage
-
Check distro-specific kernel package versionFor RHEL: `rpm -q kernel`; Fedora: `rpm -q kernel-core`; Debian: `dpkg -l | grep linux-image`Affected if The installed kernel package version matches the affected distro versions (RHEL 9.0, Fedora 38, Debian 10.0)
The system is affected if it runs a vulnerable kernel version AND has RPL protocol module loaded or enabled in the network configuration.
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.
dbcve · scoped5.10.1845.15.1176.1.34
Apply the Linux kernel patch for CVE-2023-2156, which involves updating to a patched kernel version. Given this is a denial-of-service vulnerability in the networking stack, prioritize patching systems exposed to untrusted RPL traffic, particularly those in IoT or constrained network environments.
Upgrade to Linux Kernel 5.10.184, 5.15.117, 6.1.34, or 6.2.13 or later (choose the branch appropriate for your distribution)
- Identify the currently running kernel version using 'uname -r'
- Download or obtain the kernel packages for one of the fixed versions: 5.10.184+, 5.15.117+, 6.1.34+, or 6.2.13+
- Install the new kernel packages using the distribution's package manager (e.g., 'dnf install' for RHEL/Fedora, 'apt install' for Debian)
- Reboot the system to load the new kernel using 'systemctl reboot'
- Verify the system is running the fixed kernel version with 'uname -r'
- Ensure RPL protocol functionality is working correctly after reboot
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,192.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-2156 — 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-2023-2156 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