Overview 1 match · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
1match
0in Waratek scope0.0%
0protected0.0%
0exploited0.0%
0CISA KEV0.0%
0public PoC0.0%
0EPSS ≥ 0.50.0%
Protected by Waratek
0
0.0%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
0
0.0%
No exploit published
0
0.0%
Outside Waratek scope
0
0.0%
Not applicable
1
100.0%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
1
100.0%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
0
0.0%
Working exploit published
0
0.0%
Proof of concept only
0
0.0%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
1
100.0%
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-6507 | Medium | 2023-12-08 | Not applicable | No public exploit | An issue was found in CPython 3.12.0 `subprocess` module on POSIX platforms. The issue was fixed in CPython 3.12.1 and does not affect other stable releases. When using the `extra_groups=` parameter with an empty list as a value (ie `extra_groups=[]`) the logic regressed to not call `setgroups(0, NULL)` before calling `exec()`, thus not dropping the original processes' groups before starting the new process. There is no issue when the parameter isn't used or when any value is used besides an empty list. This issue only impacts CPython processes run with sufficient privilege to make the `setgroups` system call (typically `root`). |