CVE-2023-49933

highpriority · track · 30EPSS 0.004 · 31 %ileEURUUS

grimoire priorityP2 · Scheduled

Exploitable?

—

no known exploitation

Likely / severe?

0.38% (31st) EPSS

CVSS 7.5 · high

Is it mine?

10 products

Check your exposure

Who says so?

4 sources

cnnvd · enisa_euvd · fstec_bdu · nvd

EPSS · scored 2026-10-27

An issue was discovered in SchedMD Slurm 22.05.x, 23.02.x, and 23.11.x. There is Improper Enforcement of Message Integrity During Transmission in a Communication Channel. This allows attackers to modify RPC traffic in a way that bypasses message hash checks. The fixed versions are 22.05.11, 23.02.7, and 23.11.1.

cvss

Technical severity, 0–10. One row per scoring source.

7.5

010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode⚠ sources disagree · medium–high · 6.9–7.5

v3.17.5highCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:Nprimary · NVD / NIST USexploitability 3.9 · impact 3.6

v3.17.5highAV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:Nsecondary · FSTEC (BDU) RU

v3.16.9mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N/E:Usecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

CWE-924USprimaryCWE-924US

affected products (10)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

n/a n/a≤ n/aenisa_euvdEU
Fedora Project Fedora≤ 39fstec_bduRU
Fedora Project Fedora≤ 38fstec_bduRU
SchedMd LLC Slurm≤ 23.11fstec_bduRU
SchedMd LLC Slurm≤ 23.11rc1fstec_bduRU
SchedMd LLC Slurm22.05 → 22.05.12fstec_bduRU
SchedMd LLC Slurm23.02 → 23.02.7fstec_bduRU
schedmd slurm22.05 → 22.05.12nvdUScpe:2.3:a:schedmd:slurm:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
schedmd slurm23.02 → 23.02.7nvdUScpe:2.3:a:schedmd:slurm:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
schedmd slurm= 23.11nvdUScpe:2.3:a:schedmd:slurm:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

also known as (4)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

cnnvd enisa_euvd fstec_bdu nvd NVD CVE.org MITRE

published 2023-12-14modified 2026-06-17

related (45)

Related entries.

ID	severity	EPSS	exploitable	published
CVE-2024-3596US	critical9.0OT high	14.9% (97th)	Exploit	2024-07-09
RADIUS Protocol under RFC 2865 is susceptible to forgery attacks by a local attacker who can modify any valid Response (Access-Accept, Access-Reject, or Access-Challenge) to any ot…
CVE-2022-23303US	critical9.8	3.05% (88th)	Exploit	2022-01-17
The implementations of SAE in hostapd before 2.10 and wpa_supplicant before 2.10 are vulnerable to side channel attacks as a result of cache access patterns. NOTE: this issue exist…
CVE-2022-23304US	critical9.8	1.91% (80th)	—	2022-01-17
The implementations of EAP-pwd in hostapd before 2.10 and wpa_supplicant before 2.10 are vulnerable to side-channel attacks as a result of cache access patterns. NOTE: this issue e…
CVE-2020-5869US	critical9.1	0.48% (42nd)	—	2020-04-24
In BIG-IQ 5.2.0-7.0.0, high availability (HA) synchronization is not secure by TLS and may allow on-path attackers to read / modify confidential data in transit.
CVE-2020-15685US	high8.8	0.88% (59th)	—	2022-12-22
During the plaintext phase of the STARTTLS connection setup, protocol commands could have been injected and evaluated within the encrypted session. This vulnerability affects Thund…

+40 more

references (14)

External citations — patches, advisories, analysis.

scry

Attackers weaponise vulnerabilities like this against internet-exposed services. See what is exposed on your perimeter with a free passive scan.

Free scan