NCSC proposes forgivable vs unforgivable bug model
NCSC UK publishes a research framework to classify software vulnerabilities as 'forgivable' or 'unforgivable' based on how easy mitigations are to implement.
Sourcencsc.gov.uk — open the original
What to check
- Applies to
- The 3 CVEs named below. Whether you run an affected version is not assessed: check the versions the source lists.
- Exploitation
- CISA lists CVE-2023-27997 and CVE-2023-34362 as exploited in the wild.
This NCSC UK research paper builds on Steve Christie's 2007 MITRE concept of 'unforgivable vulnerabilities' to propose a structured methodology for classifying software flaws. Using the CWE Top 25 Most Dangerous Software Weaknesses (2023) as source data, the NCSC identifies 11 top-level mitigations and scores each on cost, knowledge, and technical feasibility to derive an 'ease of implementation' rating (easy, medium, hard). Vulnerabilities whose root-cause mitigations are rated 'easy' are deemed 'unforgivable' — meaning they represent a disregard for basic secure development practice — while those requiring complex, costly, or poorly understood mitigations are considered 'forgivable'.
The paper is a policy/methodology document rather than a threat report: it contains no IOCs, active campaigns, or named threat actors, and references known past vulnerabilities (e.g., MOVEit CVE-2023-34362/36934, FortiGate CVE-2023-27997) only as illustrative examples of prior exploitation, not as new findings. Its stated goal is to encourage vendors and developers to eradicate entire vulnerability classes by hardening operating systems, development frameworks, and secure coding practices, and to prioritize mitigations like input validation, output encoding, sandboxing, and adoption of memory-safe languages such as Rust.
From an intelligence perspective, this is a low-urgency, forward-looking research and awareness publication aimed at software vendors and security engineering teams rather than defenders responding to active threats. It has no bearing on current attack surface or incident response priorities, but may inform longer-term secure development lifecycle (SDLC) policy and vendor engagement strategies.
Mentioned in this report
Source reporting: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/report/a-method-to-assess-forgivable-vs-unforgivable-vulnerabilities
Free public brief. Slack alerts on the vendors you run come with the paid plans, and a new account gets three days of them, no card.
What this brief leaves out
This page is the free tier: the write-up, the severity, the names. In the app the same report carries live profiles of the CVEs it names. The paid plans add the security research and news reporting the free tier leaves out.
It sits in a corpus of 16,436 reports from 149 sources, 661 of them written in the last seven days, and it grows through the day.
A new account starts with three days of all of it, no card, then keeps the government and CERT reporting free. Slack alerts are a paid-plan feature: name the vendors you run and Slack hears about the reports that touch them, not the rest of the week's. Nothing is charged unless you subscribe.
Create a free account What it costs