Skip to content

CVE-2023-38831

RARLAB WinRAR before 6.23 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code when a user attempts to view a benign file within a ZIP archive.

High Known exploited
Severity
7.8 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
99.81%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 99.96% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
Yes
In CISA's catalog since Aug 24, 2023
Weakness
CWE-345 Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity
CWE-351 Insufficient Type Distinction
Fix
None yet
No fixed version published
Exploited in the wild. RARLAB WinRAR Code Execution Vulnerability (RARLAB WinRAR). Required action: Apply mitigations per vendor instructions or discontinue use of the product if mitigations are unavailable. Due for U.S. federal agencies by Sep 14, 2023. Known to be used in ransomware campaigns.

Description

RARLAB WinRAR before 6.23 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code when a user attempts to view a benign file within a ZIP archive. The issue occurs because a ZIP archive may include a benign file (such as an ordinary .JPG file) and also a folder that has the same name as the benign file, and the contents of the folder (which may include executable content) are processed during an attempt to access only the benign file. This was exploited in the wild in April through October 2023.

How to fix

No fixed version has been published yet. Until one is, remove or replace the package, or turn off or isolate the affected feature. This page updates when a fix ships.

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 7.8

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

Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Weakness

CWE-345: Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity

The product does not sufficiently verify the origin or authenticity of data, in a way that causes it to accept invalid data.

CWE-351: Insufficient Type Distinction

The product does not properly distinguish between different types of elements in a way that leads to insecure behavior.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Added to CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog
  3. Remediation due for U.S. federal agencies
  4. Last updated by the source
  5. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-rfpc-qcw5-3pc4
filelock: SoftFileLock removes a live holder's marker when another user forges the PID in a writable marker
Medium Same weakness, CWE-345
GHSA-7hp6-4w63-5g45
LiteLLM: Privilege Escalation to Proxy Admin via Cross-Domain Reuse of the Salt Key
Critical Same weakness, CWE-345
GHSA-p92p-rxj5-7p2x
vLLM: Forged multimodal UUID + P0/P1 processor-cache eviction drift: unauthenticated remote crash of the whole vLLM engine
High Same weakness, CWE-345
GHSA-r4xp-prcw-77qf
better-auth: OAuth Proxy lets an attacker sign in as another user
Critical Same weakness, CWE-345
GHSA-xv7q-fvmc-jx96
Vikunja: OIDC email-fallback account linking ignores email_verified, enabling local-account takeover
High Same weakness, CWE-345
GHSA-4f6c-2vvp-gw82
Langflow: IP Spoofing Bypass via `X-Forwarded-For` Allowing Remote Configuration Write
High Same weakness, CWE-345
GHSA-qmv3-fv6v-rmhq
Electron: Sandboxed preload code cache can be poisoned by a compromised renderer
High Same weakness, CWE-345
GHSA-x33g-cr3x-6449
PyJWT accepts inconsistent OKP x/d JWKs, causing public/private key identity confusion
High Same weakness, CWE-345
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor