CVE-2023-49937
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in SchedMD Slurm 22.05.x, 23.02.x, and 23.11.x. Because of a double free, attackers can cause a denial of service or possibly execute arbitrary code. The fixed versions are 22.05.11, 23.02.7, and 23.11.1.
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 confidenceA double free vulnerability exists in SchedMD Slurm versions 22.05.x, 23.02.x, and 23.11.x. When freed memory is attempted to be freed again, it can corrupt the heap, leading to denial of service or potentially enabling arbitrary code execution.
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>= 22.05, < 22.05.12>= 23.02, < 23.02.7= 23.11CVSS 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.
-
Identify installed Slurm versionRun `scontrol --version` or `slurmctld --version` on the controller node. On RPM-based systems, also try `rpm -qa | grep slurm`.Affected if The version shown is 22.05.x (below 22.05.12), 23.02.x (below 23.02.7), or exactly 23.11.
-
Confirm Slurm controller is deployedCheck if the slurmctld daemon is running using `systemctl status slurmctld` or `ps aux | grep slurmctld`.Affected if Slurm controller daemon is active and the version from step 1 falls within the affected ranges.
-
Verify Slurm client packages versionOn worker nodes, run `srun --version` or check installed packages with the system package manager (e.g., `dpkg -l | grep slurm` or `rpm -qa | grep slurm`).Affected if Any Slurm component (controller, client, or compute) is at an affected version.
If any Slurm component (controller or client) is installed at versions 22.05.0-22.05.11, 23.02.0-23.02.6, or exactly 23.11, the environment is affected by this double free vulnerability.
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 · scoped22.05.1223.02.7
Upgrade Slurm to version 22.05.11, 23.02.7, or 23.11.1 (depending on your current branch) to address the double free vulnerability.
Upgrade to Slurm 22.05.12, 23.02.7, or 23.11.1 (whichever version line you are on)
- Identify current Slurm version using 'slurmctld --version' or package manager
- Backup all Slurm configuration files (slurm.conf, etc.) and state data
- Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- Upgrade Slurm to version 22.05.12, 23.02.7, or 23.11.1 using your distribution's package manager (e.g., 'dnf update' or 'apt-get upgrade' for Fedora/Debian-based systems)
- After upgrade, restart slurmctld and slurmd services in the correct order (controller first, then compute nodes)
- Verify the new version is running with 'slurmctld --version'
- Check logs for any errors during startup
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $9,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-49937 — 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-2023-49937 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