CVE-2010-3499
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 · uneditedF-Secure Anti-Virus does not properly interact with the processing of hcp:// URLs by the Microsoft Help and Support Center, which makes it easier for remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via malware that is correctly detected by this product, but with a detection approach that occurs too late to stop the code execution. NOTE: the researcher indicates that a vendor response was received, stating that "the inability to catch these files are caused by lacking functionality rather than programming errors."
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 confidenceF-Secure Anti-Virus has a race condition vulnerability in its interaction with Microsoft Help and Support Center's hcp:// URL protocol handler. The AV product correctly detects the associated malware, but detection occurs after the hcp:// URL processing has already executed the malicious code, allowing code execution despite proper detection.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/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.
-
Check if F-Secure Anti-Virus is installedOpen Windows Control Panel > Programs and Features, or run 'wmic product get name,version' to list installed software. Look for 'F-Secure Anti-Virus' in the list.Affected if F-Secure Anti-Virus appears in the installed programs list
-
Verify the installed F-Secure Anti-Virus versionRight-click the F-Secure icon in the system tray and select 'About' or 'Check version', or look in the program's Help > About menu.Affected if Any version of F-Secure Anti-Virus is installed (all versions are affected)
-
Confirm Windows Help and Support Center hcp:// protocol handler existsCheck Windows Registry at HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\hcp\shell\open\command to confirm the hcp:// protocol handler is registered.Affected if The hcp protocol handler exists in the Windows registry (required for the vulnerability to be exploitable)
If F-Secure Anti-Virus is installed on a system with the hcp:// protocol handler present, the race condition exists and the system is affected by this CVE.
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 dataUsers should avoid clicking untrusted hcp:// links and ensure Windows Help and Support Center is fully patched; organizations may need network-level controls to block hcp:// URLs until vendor-level fixes are available.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-3499 — 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-2010-3499 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