dbcve.org
Debian LinuxOperating system · Debian

CVE-2023-39945

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2023-08-11
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 2.6.5 / 2.9.2 or later.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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
eprosima Fast DDS is a C++ implementation of the Data Distribution Service standard of the Object Management Group. Prior to versions 2.11.0, 2.10.2, 2.9.2, and 2.6.5, a data submessage sent to PDP port raises unhandled `BadParamException` in fastcdr, which in turn crashes fastdds. Versions 2.11.0, 2.10.2, 2.9.2, and 2.6.5 contain a patch for this issue.

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 confidence

In eprosima Fast DDS versions prior to 2.11.0, 2.10.2, 2.9.2, and 2.6.5, a data submessage sent to the Participant Discovery Protocol (PDP) port triggers an unhandled BadParamException in the fastcdr library, causing a denial of service via crash of the fastdds process.

MitigationUpgrade eprosima Fast DDS to version 2.11.0, 2.10.2, 2.9.2, or 2.6.5 or later to receive the patch for the unhandled exception.

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
Debian LinuxOperating system
Affected:= 11.0= 12.0
Fast DdsApplication
Affected:>= 2.6.0, < 2.6.5>= 2.9.0, < 2.9.2>= 2.10.0, < 2.10.2

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
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 checks

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

  1. Identify installed eprosima Fast DDS version
    On Debian systems, run: dpkg -l | grep fast-dds or apt list --installed | grep fast-dds. For library-based detection, check /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfastdds.so version using: ls -la /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfastdds* and examine the file version, or use: objdump -p /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfastdds.so | grep VERSION
    Affected if The installed version falls within these vulnerable ranges: 2.6.0 to 2.6.4, 2.9.0 to 2.9.1, or 2.10.0 to 2.10.1 (any version >= 2.6.0 and < 2.6.5, >= 2.9.0 and < 2.9.2, or >= 2.10.0 and < 2.10.2)
  2. Confirm fastcdr library version
    Run: dpkg -l | grep fastcdr or ls -la /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfastcdr* to locate the fastcdr library files and their installed versions
    Affected if The fastcdr library version is present but the BadParamException is unhandled in the vulnerable Fast DDS versions listed above
  3. Verify Participant Discovery Protocol (PDP) is enabled
    Check Fast DDS configuration files (usually XML profiles in /etc/fastdds or application-specific) for <participant> elements with discovery settings. PDP is enabled by default in Fast DDS for automatic participant discovery, so any running Fast DDS process with default discovery configuration is potentially affected
    Affected if Fast DDS is running with default PDP configuration, which is the standard discovery mechanism and typically enabled by default

You are affected if Fast DDS version is 2.6.0 through 2.6.4, 2.9.0 through 2.9.1, or 2.10.0 through 2.10.1 and the Participant Discovery Protocol is active (default state), as the unhandled BadParamException will cause process crash upon receiving a malformed data submessage on the PDP port.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 2.6.5 / 2.9.2 / 2.10.2 or later
Fixed in 2.6.52.9.22.10.2
Interim mitigation

Upgrade eprosima Fast DDS to version 2.11.0, 2.10.2, 2.9.2, or 2.6.5 or later to receive the patch for the unhandled exception.

Recommended fix High confidence

Fast DDS 2.11.0 (or latest 2.x stable)

  1. 1. Identify the current Fast DDS version in use (check project dependencies, package.json, or installed libraries)
  2. 2. For Debian systems: run 'apt update' and 'apt upgrade' to obtain patched packages for Debian 11 or 12
  3. 3. For Fast DDS library: upgrade to version 2.6.5, 2.9.2, 2.10.2, or 2.11.0 (2.11.0 is the latest stable release)
  4. 4. If using a package manager (conan, apt, yum), update the dependency specification to the fixed version
  5. 5. Rebuild and redeploy the application to verify the crash no longer occurs
Caveat Minor: Upgrading between minor versions may have API additions; review the release notes for any migration considerations

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Debian Linux Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,380
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,808.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-39945 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2023-39945 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