CVE-2023-39248
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 · uneditedDell OS10 Networking Switches running 10.5.2.x and above contain an Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (Denial of Service) vulnerability, when switches are configured with VLT and VRRP. A remote unauthenticated user can cause the network to be flooded leading to Denial of Service for actual network users. This is a high severity vulnerability as it allows an attacker to cause an outage of network. Dell recommends customers to upgrade at the earliest opportunity.
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 confidenceDell OS10 Networking Switches running version 10.5.2.x and above contain an Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (Denial of Service) vulnerability when configured with VLT (Virtual Link Trunking) and VRRP (Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol). A remote unauthenticated attacker can exploit this to flood the network, causing a Denial of Service for legitimate network users.
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= 10.5.5.5CVSS 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.
-
Identify the switch model and confirm it is a Dell OS10 switchRun the command to display system information and hardware details, typically `show system` or `show version`Affected if The device is not a Dell Networking OS10 switch (this CVE only applies to OS10)
-
Determine the installed OS10 versionRun the command to display the OS10 software version, typically `show version`Affected if The installed version equals exactly 10.5.5.5 (the affected version per the CVE)
-
Verify if VLT (Virtual Link Trunking) is configuredRun the command to display VLT domain status, typically `show vlt <domain-id>` or `show vlt detail`Affected if VLT is enabled and configured on the switch (VLT must be present for the vulnerability to apply)
-
Verify if VRRP (Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol) is configuredRun the command to display VRRP configuration and status, typically `show vrrp` or `show ip vrrp`Affected if VRRP is enabled and configured on any interface (VRRP must be present for the vulnerability to apply)
You are affected if your Dell OS10 switch is running exactly version 10.5.5.5 AND has both VLT and VRRP configurations enabled simultaneously.
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 dataDell recommends upgrading to the latest OS10 version at the earliest opportunity. Organizations should identify all affected switches configured with VLT and VRRP, schedule maintenance windows, and apply the recommended firmware update.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-39248 — 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-2023-39248 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