CVE-2023-41094
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 · uneditedTouchLink packets processed after timeout or out of range due to Operation on a Resource after Expiration and Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime may allow a device to be added outside of valid TouchLink range or pairing duration This issue affects Ember ZNet 7.1.x from 7.1.3 through 7.1.5; 7.2.x from 7.2.0 through 7.2.3; Version 7.3 and later are unaffected
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 confidenceThis is a timing and resource management vulnerability in Silicon Labs Ember ZNet Zigbee stack where TouchLink packets continue to be processed after the valid timeout period or when the device is out of range. The vulnerability stems from improper handling of resource expiration - packets are accepted after they should have been rejected due to 'Operation on a Resource after Expiration' and 'Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime'. This allows an attacker to add malicious devices to a Zigbee network from outside the intended TouchLink range or outside the permitted pairing window.
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>= 7.1.3, <= 7.1.5>= 7.2.0, <= 7.2.3CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Determine Ember ZNet firmware versionAccess the device via UART debug, CLI interface, or consult firmware metadata/bill of materials. Use command like 'version' or 'info' in the Ember debug console, or check firmware file properties.Affected if Version is 7.1.3 through 7.1.5, or 7.2.0 through 7.2.3 (not 7.3.0 or later)
-
Verify TouchLink commissioning is enabledCheck the Zigbee stack configuration or runtime settings. In Ember GUI or CLI, look for TouchLink-related commissioning parameters or check NCP (Network Co-Processor) configuration.Affected if TouchLink is enabled as a commissioning method in the stack configuration
-
Confirm device is in or recently was in pairing modeCheck device commissioning state via CLI command such as 'plugin finding-mode' or through the network management interface. Review logs for recent TouchLink initiation events.Affected if Device has active TouchLink pairing window or was in pairing mode recently (within typical timeout period)
-
Check for unexpected device joinsReview network join logs, neighbor table, or use network analyzer to detect devices that joined from outside expected TouchLink range. Look for pairing events in the log that occurred after timeout should have expired.Affected if New devices appear in network that were not authenticated within the expected TouchLink window
Device is affected if running Ember ZNet versions 7.1.3-7.1.5 or 7.2.0-7.2.3 AND TouchLink commissioning is enabled AND the device was in or recently exited a pairing state, allowing potential unauthorized device joins from out-of-range attackers.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade Ember ZNet firmware to version 7.3 or later which contains the fix for this vulnerability. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, consider network monitoring for unusual TouchLink pairing activities and implement additional authentication for device joins.
EmberZnet 7.3.0 or later
- 1. Identify the current EmberZnet version in use (7.1.x or 7.2.x)
- 2. Plan for a firmware update cycle to upgrade the EmberZnet stack
- 3. Obtain EmberZnet version 7.3.0 or later from Silicon Labs (support.community.silabs.com or through official distribution channels)
- 4. Update the EmberZnet firmware on all affected devices to version 7.3.0 or later
- 5. Verify the upgrade was successful and test TouchLink functionality to confirm the fix is applied
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-41094 — 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-2023-41094 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