CVE-2010-4729
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 · uneditedZikula before 1.2.3 does not use the authid protection mechanism for (1) the lostpassword form and (2) mailpasswd processing, which makes it easier for remote attackers to generate a flood of password requests and possibly conduct cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks via multiple form submissions.
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 confidenceZikula versions prior to 1.2.3 lack authid (anti-CSRF token) protection on the lostpassword form and mailpasswd processing functions. This allows attackers to submit multiple password reset requests without validation or to craft malicious CSRF attacks that trigger password resets for users without their consent.
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<= 1.2.2= 1.1.2= 1.2.1CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/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 Zikula installation versionLocate the version file or admin panel (typically system info or config.php) to determine the installed Zikula version numberAffected if The installed version is 1.1.2, 1.2.1, or any version 1.2.2 or lower (1.2.0, 1.1.x series, etc.)
-
Compare version against fixed releaseVerify if the installed version is 1.2.3 or later - versions prior to 1.2.3 lack the authid protectionAffected if The installed version is below 1.2.3 (e.g., 1.2.2, 1.2.1, 1.1.2, or lower)
-
Inspect lostpassword form for authid tokenAccess the password reset form (typically /user/lostpassword or similar route) and view the page source to check for a hidden authid token fieldAffected if The form lacks an authid or CSRF token field in the HTML source
-
Verify mailpasswd function includes authid validationExamine the mailpasswd processing script or module to determine if authid verification is performed before processing password reset requestsAffected if The mailpasswd processing function does not validate an authid/anti-CSRF token before processing password resets
A Zikula installation is affected if it runs version 1.2.2 or lower (including 1.2.1 and 1.1.2) and the password reset form and mailpasswd function lack authid/anti-CSRF token protection.
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 Zikula to version 1.2.3 or later, which implements authid protection on password reset forms. If immediate patching is not possible, implement web application firewall rules to rate-limit password reset submissions.
- 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-2010-4729 — 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-2010-4729 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