CVE-2009-3472
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 · uneditedIBM DB2 8 before FP18, 9.1 before FP8, and 9.5 before FP4 allows remote authenticated users to bypass intended access restrictions, and update, insert, or delete table rows, via unspecified vectors.
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 · moderate confidenceIBM DB2 versions 8 before FP18, 9.1 before FP8, and 9.5 before FP4 contain an access control bypass vulnerability where remote authenticated users can circumvent intended row-level security restrictions and perform unauthorized UPDATE, INSERT, or DELETE operations on table rows.
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= 8.0= 9.1= 9.5CVSS 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
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/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 installed DB2 versionRun 'db2level' command or query DB2 for version information using 'SELECT * FROM SYSIBM.SYSVERSION'Affected if Version is 8.x, 9.1.x, or 9.5.x (verify exact version number matches affected range)
-
Determine fix pack levelRun 'db2level' and locate the fix pack number in the output, or query 'SELECT SERVICE_LEVEL FROM SYSIBM.SYSVERSION'Affected if For v8: fix pack is below FP18; for v9.1: fix pack is below FP8; for v9.5: fix pack is below FP4
-
Check if row-level security is configuredQuery system catalog tables for row-level security policies, or inspect DDL for tables with SECURITY POLICY clausesAffected if Row-level security policies are defined on any tables in the database
-
Verify remote authentication is enabledCheck DB2 configuration for authentication settings using 'db2 get dbm cfg' or 'db2 get db cfg' and review AUTHENTICATION parameterAffected if Authentication is set to something other than NONE (e.g., SERVER, KERBEROS) allowing remote connections
If running DB2 v8 before FP18, v9.1 before FP8, or v9.5 before FP4 AND row-level security is configured, the environment is vulnerable to unauthorized row access.
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 dataApply the appropriate IBM DB2 fix pack: FP18 for v8, FP8 for v9.1, or FP4 for v9.5. Prior to deployment in production, validate the fix pack in a staging environment to ensure compatibility with existing applications and configurations.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-3472 — 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-2009-3472 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