CVE-2023-5908
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 · uneditedKEPServerEX is vulnerable to a buffer overflow which may allow an attacker to crash the product being accessed or leak information.
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 confidenceKEPServerEX (an OPC server from PTC) contains a buffer overflow vulnerability that could allow remote attackers to cause denial of service (crash the product) or potentially leak sensitive information. The critical CVSS score of 9.1 indicates the flaw is likely exploitable over the network without authentication and has significant impact on availability.
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<= 7.614<= 6.14.263.0<= 6.14all versions<= 1.7<= 6.14.263.0<= 6.14.263.0<= 6.14.263.0CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed OPC server productCheck the installed programs on the system for any of these: KEPServerEX, Keepserverex, Kepserver Enterprise, Top Server, Thingworx Kepware Server, Thingworx Kepware Edge, Thingworx Industrial Connectivity, OPC Aggregator, or GE Industrial Gateway Server. Look in Windows Programs and Features, or check the installation directory typically found under C:\Program Files\PTC or C:\Program Files\KepwareAffected if Any of the listed products are installed, proceed to version check
-
Determine installed versionOpen the application's About or Help menu within the KEPServerEX/KEPServer interface, or check the version displayed in the service name. Alternatively, check the executable properties of the main server process (kepserverex.exe or similar) by right-clicking and selecting Properties > DetailsAffected if Version is at or below 7.614 for GE Industrial Gateway Server, at or below 6.14.263.0 for Keepserverex/Kepware Server variants, at or below 6.14 for OPC Aggregator, at or below 1.7 for Thingworx Kepware Edge, or for Thingworx Industrial Connectivity any version is affected
-
Verify OPC server is running and accessibleCheck if the OPC server service is running by opening Services (services.msc) and looking for 'KEPServerEX' or the respective product service. Also verify the listening ports (typically OPC Enum on 3539, or OPC server on 49320 or custom ports) are open using netstat -an | findstr LISTENINGAffected if The service is running and ports are in LISTENING state, the vulnerability is potentially exploitable over the network
-
Assess network exposureRun netsh interface ipv4 show excludedportrange protocol=tcp or check firewall rules to determine if the OPC server ports are exposed to untrusted networks. Review firewall rules allowing inbound connections to ports the OPC server uses, particularly from external or DMZ networksAffected if The OPC server is reachable from untrusted networks or the internet without proper network segmentation, the system is at higher risk from remote exploitation
You are affected if any of these products are installed and the version falls within or below the affected ranges, especially if the service is running and network-accessible.
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 dataApply the vendor patch from PTC for KEPServerEX. If no patch is immediately available, consider network segmentation to limit exposure and implement additional monitoring for anomalous traffic to the OPC server.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $6,080.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-5908 — 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-2023-5908 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