CVE-2023-42005
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 Db2 on Cloud Pak for Data and Db2 Warehouse on Cloud Pak for Data 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, and 4.8 could allow a user with access to the Kubernetes pod, to make system calls compromising the security of containers. IBM X-Force ID: 265264.
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 Db2 on Cloud Pak for Data and Db2 Warehouse on Cloud Pak for Data versions 3.5 through 4.8 contain a container security vulnerability where a user with access to the underlying Kubernetes pod can make privileged system calls, potentially enabling container escape or privilege escalation beyond the intended pod isolation boundaries.
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= 3.5= 4.0= 4.5= 4.6= 4.7= 4.8= 3.5= 4.0= 4.5= 4.6= 4.7= 4.8CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Identify IBM Db2 Cloud Pak for Data installationList all installed operators and pods in the cluster related to IBM Db2 or Db2 Warehouse. Look for namespaces containing 'db2', 'cp4d', or 'cloud-pak' in their names.Affected if IBM Db2 on Cloud Pak for Data or Db2 Warehouse is installed in the cluster
-
Determine the installed Db2 versionCheck the version of the IBM Db2 or Db2 Warehouse operator and operand. Use 'kubectl get deployments' or 'oc get deployments' in the Db2 namespace and inspect the version labels or image tags.Affected if The installed version matches 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, or 4.8
-
Verify pod security context configurationInspect the security context of Db2 pods by running 'kubectl get pod -n <db2-namespace> -o yaml' and checking the 'securityContext' and 'spec.containers.securityContext' fields for privileged mode or excessive capabilities.Affected if Pods are running with privileged: true or have additional capabilities beyond what is required for normal operation
-
Check for unauthorized pod accessReview Kubernetes audit logs and pod access control policies to determine if any untrusted users or service accounts have shell access or exec permissions into Db2 pods.Affected if Users or service accounts outside the privileged admin group have pod exec or shell access
-
Inspect container runtime configurationExamine the pod specification for any hostPath mounts, hostNetwork, or hostPID settings that could enable container escape.Affected if Db2 pods have hostPath mounts, hostNetwork enabled, or hostPID sharing enabled
A user is affected if they have IBM Db2 on Cloud Pak for Data or Db2 Warehouse versions 3.5 through 4.8 running and any untrusted user has access to the underlying Kubernetes pod where privileged system calls could be made.
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 · scopedApply IBM's security patches for this vulnerability when available. In the interim, enforce strict pod security policies, limit pod access to authorized personnel only, and implement network segmentation to reduce the attack surface.
IBM Cloud Pak for Data 4.8.x or later (latest available fix pack)
- Check current IBM Cloud Pak for Data version by running: oc get operandrequest -A | grep db2u or by checking the Cloud Pak console
- Backup all Db2 databases and configurations before upgrading
- Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- Upgrade IBM Cloud Pak for Data to the latest available fix pack (4.8.x or later) that includes the security fix for CVE-2023-42005
- Verify the upgrade completed successfully by checking the operator status: oc get csv -n ibm-common-services
- Confirm the Db2 operands are in Running state: oc get db2ucluster -A
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2023-42005 — 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-2023-42005 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