SecureconnectorApplication · Forescout

CVE-2023-39374

HIGH · 7.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2023-09-03
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
81/100
Remediation priority · High
No privileges

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 · unedited
ForeScout NAC SecureConnector version 11.2 - CWE-427: Uncontrolled Search Path Element

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 confidence

ForeScout NAC SecureConnector version 11.2 contains an uncontrolled search path element (CWE-427) vulnerability. This allows an attacker to potentially place malicious DLLs in locations where the application searches for libraries, causing arbitrary code execution with the privileges of the SecureConnector service.

MitigationApply vendor-supplied patches for version 11.2; if no patch exists, restrict file system permissions on directories in the application DLL search path and implement DLL search order enforcement via manifest or registry controls.

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
SecureconnectorApplication
Affected:= 11.2

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
Local
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed ForeScout SecureConnector version
    Check the Windows registry key HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\{DisplayName} for DisplayVersion, or right-click the SecureConnector.exe file in the installation directory and select Properties > Details to view FileVersion
    Affected if The version displayed is exactly 11.2
  2. Locate the SecureConnector installation directory
    Open Services.msc, find the Forescout SecureConnector service, right-click and select Properties to view the executable path, or check the registry key from the previous step for InstallLocation
    Affected if The installation path contains the SecureConnector executable and matches a version 11.2 installation
  3. Verify the SecureConnector service exists
    Open Services.msc and look for a service named Forescout SecureConnector or SecureConnector, or run 'sc query' from command prompt to enumerate services
    Affected if The service exists and is installed on the system, indicating version 11.2 is deployed
  4. Inspect DLL search path for the application
    Use Process Monitor (from Sysinternals) to capture DLL load events for SecureConnector.exe, or check the application directory structure for any subdirectories with weak permissions that allow write access to non-admin users
    Affected if The application loads DLLs from directories that are writable by standard users or that accept DLLs from untrusted locations

A system is affected if ForeScout SecureConnector version 11.2 is installed and the application or its service is present, since the uncontrolled search path vulnerability can be exploited to load malicious DLLs with service-level privileges.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply vendor-supplied patches for version 11.2; if no patch exists, restrict file system permissions on directories in the application DLL search path and implement DLL search order enforcement via manifest or registry controls.

Fix this in Secureconnector Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
20.0 hours of engineering $3,500
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,600.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-39374 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-39374 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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