CVE-2010-0525
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 · uneditedMail in Apple Mac OS X before 10.6.3 does not properly enforce the key usage extension during processing of a keychain that specifies multiple certificates for an e-mail recipient, which might make it easier for remote attackers to obtain sensitive information via a brute-force attack on a weakly encrypted e-mail message.
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 confidenceThe Mail application in Apple Mac OS X before 10.6.3 fails to properly enforce the key usage extension when processing keychains containing multiple certificates for an email recipient. This allows acceptance of certificates that may not be intended for email encryption, potentially enabling weakly encrypted messages vulnerable to brute-force attacks.
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<= 10.6.2= 10.5.0= 10.5.1= 10.5.2= 10.5.3= 10.5.4= 10.5.5= 10.5.6= 10.5.7= 10.5.8= 10.6.0= 10.6.1<= 10.6.2= 10.5.0= 10.5.1= 10.5.2= 10.5.3= 10.5.4= 10.5.5= 10.5.6= 10.5.7= 10.5.8= 10.6.0= 10.6.1CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
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.
-
Check Mac OS X versionGo to Apple menu > About This Mac to view the installed version numberAffected if The version is 10.6.2 or earlier, or falls within 10.5.0 through 10.6.1 (including 10.5.0-10.5.8 and 10.6.0-10.6.1)
-
Confirm Mac OS X Server if applicableCheck About This Mac or run 'sw_vers' in Terminal; Server versions have the same vulnerabilityAffected if Running Mac OS X Server version 10.6.2 or earlier, or versions 10.5.0-10.6.1
-
Verify Mail application is in useOpen Mail app and check if it is configured for sending encrypted or signed email (S/MIME)Affected if Mail is configured to send encrypted email using S/MIME certificates
-
Inspect keychain for multiple recipient certificatesOpen Keychain Access, select Login keychain, search for the email recipient's certificate, and examine if multiple certificates exist for the same email addressAffected if The keychain contains multiple certificates for an email recipient, where at least one lacks proper key usage extension for email encryption
Affected if running Mac OS X or Mac OS X Server version 10.6.2 or earlier AND using Mail with keychains that contain multiple certificates for email recipients, allowing acceptance of improperly validated certificates for encryption.
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 dataUpdate Mac OS X to version 10.6.3 or later, which contains Apple's fix for proper key usage extension enforcement in Mail.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-0525 — 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-2010-0525 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