CVE-2023-24011
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 · moderate confidenceThis vulnerability exists in secure DDS (Data Distribution Service) implementations used in ROS 2 environments. Attackers can craft malicious DDS Participants or ROS 2 Nodes with valid certificates to gain full control of the secure DDS databus. The root cause is a non-compliant implementation of permission document verification where the OpenSSL PKCS7_verify function is improperly used for S/MIME signature validation, allowing bypass of proper certificate chain validation.
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 if secure DDS or ROS 2 security is enabledLook for security-related configuration files in the ROS 2 workspace, typically in a 'security' folder or XML permission document files with names containing 'permissions.xml' or 'permissions.p7s'Affected if Secure DDS with authentication and encryption is enabled and permission documents are being used for access control
-
Determine the DDS implementation and version in useCheck the ROS 2 distribution documentation or inspect installed packages (e.g., run 'ros2 pkg list | grep -i dds' or check the RMW_IMPLEMENTATION environment variable)Affected if The DDS implementation is one that supports secure features and uses OpenSSL for PKCS7 verification
-
Locate permission document configuration filesSearch for permission XML files and their corresponding S/MIME signature files (.p7s or .sig) in the system's security configuration directoriesAffected if Permission documents with S/MIME signatures are deployed for securing DDS communications
-
Verify the PKCS7 verification implementationExamine the source code or documentation of the DDS security plugin if accessible, specifically looking for how PKCS7_verify is called during permission validationAffected if The PKCS7 verification does not properly validate certificate chains or uses flags unsuitable for S/MIME signature validation (e.g., missing PKCS7_NOCHAIN flag or incorrect flags)
-
Check for presence of valid but unauthorized certificatesReview installed certificates in the DDS security configuration; verify that only intended participants have valid credentialsAffected if Multiple DDS Participants or ROS 2 Nodes possess valid certificates that could be exploited to gain unauthorized control
A system is affected if it uses secure DDS/ROS 2 with permission document validation that relies on OpenSSL PKCS7_verify for S/MIME signature validation without proper certificate chain verification.
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 dataOrganizations using affected secure DDS implementations should contact their DDS vendor for patches that properly implement PKCS#7 certificate validation using compliant PKCS7_verify parameters, and ensure permission document verification correctly validates certificate chains.
- Consultation4.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-24011 — 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-2023-24011 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