CVE-2023-25683
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 · uneditedIBM PowerVM Hypervisor FW950.00 through FW950.71, FW1010.00 through FW1010.40, FW1020.00 through FW1020.20, and FW1030.00 through FW1030.11 could allow an attacker to obtain sensitive information if they gain service access to the HMC. IBM X-Force ID: 247592.
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 confidenceIBM PowerVM Hypervisor firmware versions FW950.00-FW950.71, FW1010.00-FW1010.40, FW1020.00-FW1020.20, and FW1030.00-FW1030.11 contain an information disclosure vulnerability. An attacker who obtains service-level access to the Hardware Management Console (HMC) could potentially view sensitive system information that should be protected.
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>= fw950, <= fw950.71>= fw1010, <= fw1010.40>= fw1020, <= fw1020.20>= fw1030, <= fw1030.11CVSS 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
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 PowerVM Hypervisor firmware versionLog into the Hardware Management Console (HMC) and navigate to Systems > Manage Systems > System Properties, or run command `lssyscfg -r sys` on HMC to list system details including firmware version (displayed as FW950.xx, FW1010.xx, etc.)Affected if The firmware version falls within FW950.00-FW950.71, FW1010.00-FW1010.40, FW1020.00-FW1020.20, or FW1030.00-FW1030.11
-
Confirm HMC is deployedVerify that a Hardware Management Console (HMC) is present in the environment to manage the PowerVM hypervisor. Check for HMC appliance or virtual appliance in the infrastructure inventoryAffected if An HMC is used to manage the PowerVM hypervisor (the vulnerability requires HMC access)
-
Review HMC user access accountsFrom HMC, go to HMC Management > Users and Access, or run `lsuser` command to list all HMC user accounts. Identify accounts with Service Representative (service) or Administrator privilegesAffected if There are HMC accounts with service-level or elevated privileges accessible to unauthorized personnel
You are affected if your PowerVM Hypervisor firmware version is within the ranges FW950.00-FW950.71, FW1010.00-FW1010.40, FW1020.00-FW1020.20, or FW1030.00-FW1030.11 AND you have an HMC with service-level access that could be obtained by an attacker.
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 appropriate IBM PowerVM firmware update to a version beyond the affected ranges (FW950.72+, FW1010.41+, FW1020.21+, FW1030.12+). Restrict HMC service access to authorized personnel and follow least-privilege principles for HMC accounts.
- 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-2023-25683 — 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-2023-25683 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