CVE-2023-53311 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2023-53311
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress
Analysis In Progress

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity:
    Attack Complexity Analysis In Progress
  • Attack Vector:
    Attack Vector Under Analysis
  • Privileges Required: None
    No authentication is required for exploitation.
  • Scope:
    Impact is confined to the initially vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: None
    No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2023-53311 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Last updated: 🕑 17 Sep 2025, 14:18 UTC
Originally published on: 🕔 16 Sep 2025, 17:15 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2023-53311 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2023-53311: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nilfs2: fix use-after-free of nilfs_root in dirtying inodes via iput During unmount process of nilfs2, nothing holds nilfs_root structure after nilfs2 detaches its writer in nilfs_detach_log_writer(). Previously, nilfs_evict_inode() could cause use-after-free read for nilfs_root if inodes are left in "garbage_list" and released by nilfs_dispose_list at the end of nilfs_detach_log_writer(), and this bug was fixed by commit 9b5a04ac3ad9 ("nilfs2: fix use-after-free bug of nilfs_root in nilfs_evict_inode()"). However, it turned out that there is another possibility of UAF in the call path where mark_inode_dirty_sync() is called from iput(): nilfs_detach_log_writer() nilfs_dispose_list() iput() mark_inode_dirty_sync() __mark_inode_dirty() nilfs_dirty_inode() __nilfs_mark_inode_dirty() nilfs_load_inode_block() --> causes UAF of nilfs_root struct This can happen after commit 0ae45f63d4ef ("vfs: add support for a lazytime mount option"), which changed iput() to call mark_inode_dirty_sync() on its final reference if i_state has I_DIRTY_TIME flag and i_nlink is non-zero. This issue appears after commit 28a65b49eb53 ("nilfs2: do not write dirty data after degenerating to read-only") when using the syzbot reproducer, but the issue has potentially existed before. Fix this issue by adding a "purging flag" to the nilfs structure, setting that flag while disposing the "garbage_list" and checking it in __nilfs_mark_inode_dirty(). Unlike commit 9b5a04ac3ad9 ("nilfs2: fix use-after-free bug of nilfs_root in nilfs_evict_inode()"), this patch does not rely on ns_writer to determine whether to skip operations, so as not to break recovery on mount. The nilfs_salvage_orphan_logs routine dirties the buffer of salvaged data before attaching the log writer, so changing __nilfs_mark_inode_dirty() to skip the operation when ns_writer is NULL will cause recovery write to fail. The purpose of using the cleanup-only flag is to allow for narrowing of such conditions.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2023-53311

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2023-53311 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2023-53311

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2023-53311.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2023-53311, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2023-53311, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2023-53311 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2023-53311 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2023-53311 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2023-53311 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2023-53311: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2025-66269 – The RupsMon and USBMate services in UPSilon 2000 run with SYSTEM privileges and contain unquoted service paths. This allows a local attacker to per...
  • CVE-2025-66266 – The RupsMon.exe service executable in UPSilon 2000 has insecure permissions, allowing the 'Everyone' group Full Control. A local attacker can repla...
  • CVE-2025-66021 – OWASP Java HTML Sanitizer is a configureable HTML Sanitizer written in Java, allowing inclusion of HTML authored by third-parties in web applicatio...
  • CVE-2025-66020 – Valibot helps validate data using a schema. In versions from 0.31.0 to 1.1.0, the EMOJI_REGEX used in the emoji action is vulnerable to a Regular E...
  • CVE-2025-12848 – Webform Multiple File Upload module for Drupal 7.x contains a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the file name renderer. An unauthenticate...