Skip to content

CVE-2023-4039

Is CVE-2023-4039 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

Community verdict: No field verdicts yet. Be the first practitioner to weigh in.

Give your verdict☆ Watch

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
4.8 Medium
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.8%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-693
CWE

Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.

cisa ssvc

CISA Vulnrichment · assessed

Exploitation
Public PoC
in the wild
Automatable
No
at scale
Technical impact
Partial
on success

CISA decision, by how critical the affected system is to you:

  • low impact → Track
  • medium impact → Track
  • high impact → Track*

Track: normal patch cycle · Track*: watch closely · Attend: patch sooner · Act: patch now. About SSVC ↗

scanner noise

anonymous, aggregated from real reports · via Denoizr
ScannerFlagged inTurned out noise
Wiz1 scan0%

How often this CVE was flagged by each scanner and how much turned out to be noise (false positives), aggregated anonymously from de-noised reports. Higher noise means the alert is more often not a real risk — verify your exposure.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Officially disputed

The CVE record itself is disputed or rejected upstream — a strong candidate for a false positive in scanners. Confirm with a verdict.

Based on NVD record status

Confirm or dispute →
Affected:GNU

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

**DISPUTED**A failure in the -fstack-protector feature in GCC-based toolchains that target AArch64 allows an attacker to exploit an existing buffer overflow in dynamically-sized local variables in your application without this being detected. This stack-protector failure only applies to C99-style dynamically-sized local variables or those created using alloca(). The stack-protector operates as intended for statically-sized local variables. The default behavior when the stack-protector detects an overflow is to terminate your application, resulting in controlled loss of availability. An attacker who can exploit a buffer overflow without triggering the stack-protector might be able to change program flow control to cause an uncontrolled loss of availability or to go further and affect confidentiality or integrity. NOTE: The GCC project argues that this is a missed hardening bug and not a vulnerability by itself.

References

NVD MITRE CVE.org

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2023-4039
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2023-4039/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2023-4039)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2023-4039"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2023-4039/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2023-4039"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

timeline

  1. CISA SSVC assessment · exploitation: poc
  2. Published by NVD

Score and exploit changes tracked since .

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

Curated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

  • 0
    Field note · TruePositive EditorialCurated

    No confirmed in-the-wild exploitation or public exploit was found for this yet.

Add a field note or remediationoptional
Note type

What are you adding?

Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

Related CVEs

Same weakness: CWE-693.