CVE-2010-4568
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 2.14 through 2.22.7; 3.0.x, 3.1.x, and 3.2.x before 3.2.10; 3.4.x before 3.4.10; 3.6.x before 3.6.4; and 4.0.x before 4.0rc2 does not properly generate random values for cookies and tokens, which allows remote attackers to obtain access to arbitrary accounts via unspecified vectors, related to an insufficient number of calls to the srand function.
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 confidenceBugzilla fails to properly seed its random number generator (srand) when generating session cookies and authentication tokens. Insufficient entropy in srand() calls makes the generated values predictable, allowing remote attackers to forge valid session cookies and gain unauthorized access to arbitrary user accounts.
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= 2.14= 2.14.1= 2.14.2= 2.14.3= 2.14.4= 2.14.5= 2.16= 2.16.1= 2.16.2= 2.16.3= 2.16.4= 2.16.5CVSS 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
- 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 versionLocate the Bugzilla version file (typically version.pl in the Bugzilla root directory) or access the Bugzilla administration page that displays the version numberAffected if The installed version is 2.14, 2.14.1, 2.14.2, 2.14.3, 2.14.4, 2.14.5, 2.16, 2.16.1, 2.16.2, 2.16.3, 2.16.4, or 2.16.5
-
Verify Bugzilla installation pathConfirm the Bugzilla installation directory by checking the web server configuration or locating the main Bugzilla CGI scripts (such as query.cgi or buglist.cgi)Affected if The installation is a vulnerable version from step 1 and uses the standard Bugzilla CGI-based authentication mechanism
-
Check session token generation methodExamine the Bugzilla code in the session.pm or Token.pm modules for the srand() usage in generating cookies and tokens. Look for direct calls to srand() without proper /dev/urandom entropy seedingAffected if The code uses srand() without proper entropy seeding for session cookie or authentication token generation
The environment is affected if Bugzilla version 2.14.x or 2.16.x (specific versions listed) is installed and relies on the built-in srand()-based session and token generation.
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 version 3.2.10, 3.4.10, 3.6.4, 4.0rc2 or later. These versions implement proper random seeding using /dev/urandom or equivalent entropy sources for cryptographic token generation.
- 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-2010-4568 — 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-2010-4568 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