CVE-2023-24010
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 · uneditedAn attacker can arbitrarily craft malicious DDS Participants (or ROS 2 Nodes) with valid certificates to compromise and get full control of the attacked secure DDS databus system by exploiting vulnerable attributes in the configuration of PKCS#7 certificate’s validation. This is caused by a non-compliant implementation of permission document verification used by some DDS vendors. Specifically, an improper use of the OpenSSL PKCS7_verify function used to validate S/MIME signatures.
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 · high confidenceThis vulnerability affects secure DDS (Data Distribution Service) and ROS 2 systems where PKCS#7 certificate validation in permission document verification is implemented non-compliantly. The improper use of OpenSSL's PKCS7_verify function allows attackers with valid certificates to craft malicious DDS Participants that bypass permission checks and gain full control of the secure databus system.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:L
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 secure DDS or ROS 2 installationLocate DDS or ROS 2 installations on the system and check for security-related configurations in the governance or permission XML files. Common locations include /opt/ros/*/share or custom workspace directories.Affected if The system uses secure DDS or ROS 2 with permission-based access control enabled
-
Locate permission document filesFind permission XML files (typically named permissions.xml or similar) in the DDS security configuration directories. These documents define which DDS Participants are authorized to publish/subscribe.Affected if Permission documents are configured and being used for access control
-
Verify PKCS#7 certificate usage in permissionsInspect the permission document XML for PKCS#7 signed certificate references. Look for <permissions> elements that contain <grant> blocks with certificate subject names and signed permission structures.Affected if Permission documents reference PKCS#7 signed certificates for participant authentication
-
Check PKCS7_verify implementationExamine the source code or binary of the security plugin handling permission verification. Search for PKCS7_verify function calls and verify if they properly validate the entire certificate chain, revocation status, and signature integrity per S/MIME specification.Affected if The PKCS7_verify implementation does not properly validate certificate chains, revocation checks, or follows non-compliant validation behavior
-
Confirm permission enforcement is activeVerify that the secure DDS participant is actually enforcing permission checks at runtime. Check that the security configuration XML files (permissions.xml, governance.p7s, permissions.p7s) are loaded and applied.Affected if Security permissions are loaded but enforcement can be bypassed by specially crafted valid certificates
A system is affected if it runs secure DDS or ROS 2 with permission-based security enabled and uses PKCS#7 certificate validation that fails to properly validate the full certificate chain and revocation status per S/MIME specification.
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 dataFix the PKCS7_verify implementation to properly validate S/MIME signatures per specification, ensuring all certificate chain validation, revocation checks, and permission document verification are correctly performed before granting access.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 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 $9,504.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-24010 — 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-2023-24010 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