CVE-2023-53774
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 · uneditedMiniDVBLinux 5.4 contains a remote code execution vulnerability in the SVDRP protocol that allows remote attackers to send commands to manipulate TV systems. Attackers can send crafted SVDRP commands through the svdrpsend.sh script to execute messages and potentially control the video disk recorder remotely.
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 confidenceMiniDVBLinux 5.4 has a critical RCE vulnerability in its SVDRP (Simple Video Disk Recorder Protocol) service. Attackers can send crafted commands via the svdrpsend.sh client script to execute arbitrary commands on the VDR server, allowing full remote control of the video disk recorder system.
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<= 5.4CVSS 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 MiniDVBLinux versionCheck /etc/version or run 'cat /etc/*release*' to find the installed MiniDVBLinux version numberAffected if Version is 5.4 or lower
-
Confirm SVDRP service is runningRun 'ps aux | grep vdr' or 'systemctl status vdr' to check if the VDR (Video Disk Recorder) service with SVDRP is activeAffected if SVDRP-enabled VDR process is running
-
Check SVDRP network bindingInspect /etc/vdr/svdrphosts.conf or run 'netstat -tlnp | grep svdrp' to see if SVDRP binds to 0.0.0.0 (all interfaces) rather than 127.0.0.1 (localhost only)Affected if SVDRP listens on 0.0.0.0 or non-loopback address, exposing it to network
-
Verify SVDRP authentication statusCheck /etc/vdr/svdrp.conf for any authentication configuration, or inspect if the SVDRP port (2001 default) requires credentials when connectingAffected if No authentication is configured or SVDRP accepts connections without credentials
-
Locate svdrpsend.sh client scriptRun 'which svdrpsend.sh' or check /usr/bin/svdrpsend.sh to confirm the vulnerable client script is present on the systemAffected if svdrpsend.sh exists and can be used to send commands to the SVDRP service
User is affected if running MiniDVBLinux 5.4 or lower with SVDRP service exposed to the network without authentication.
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.
From vendor dataImplement authentication for SVDRP service and add input validation/sanitization to all SVDRP command handlers. If SVDRP is not required externally, restrict it to localhost or disable it entirely.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-53774 — 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-2023-53774 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