CVE-2009-0486
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedBugzilla 3.2.1, 3.0.7, and 3.3.2, when running under mod_perl, calls the srand function at startup time, which causes Apache children to have the same seed and produce insufficiently random numbers for random tokens, which allows remote attackers to bypass cross-site request forgery (CSRF) protection mechanisms and conduct unauthorized activities as other users.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceWhen Bugzilla runs under mod_perl, it calls srand() at Apache child process startup, causing all children to share the same random seed. This produces predictable random numbers for CSRF tokens, allowing attackers to bypass CSRF protection and perform unauthorized actions as other users.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 3.0.7= 3.2.1= 3.3.2CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify Bugzilla versionCheck the Bugzilla version file or admin interface for the installed version numberAffected if Version is 3.0.7, 3.2.1, or 3.3.2
-
Confirm Bugzilla is running under mod_perlReview the Apache configuration for the Bugzilla virtual host or directory, looking for 'PerlModule' or 'mod_perl' directives, or check if the Bugzilla CGI scripts are being handled by mod_perl rather than plain CGIAffected if Apache is configured to handle Bugzilla via mod_perl (mod_perl handler)
-
Examine the srand() call location in Bugzilla codeLocate the Bugzilla CGI or Perl modules and search for srand() calls - verify if srand() is being called at module load time or startup rather than per-request with proper entropyAffected if srand() is called at Apache child process initialization (startup) rather than with random entropy for each request
If Bugzilla version is 3.0.7, 3.2.1, or 3.3.2 AND it is running under mod_perl with srand() called at startup, the CSRF tokens are predictable and the environment is affected.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade Bugzilla to a patched version (3.2.2, 3.0.8, or 3.4 or later) that calls srand() with proper randomization per-request instead of at startup, or implement a code fix to ensure srand() is called with random entropy for each request.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-0486 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2009-0486 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data