CVE-2011-0912
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 · uneditedArgument injection vulnerability in IBM Lotus Notes 8.0.x before 8.0.2 FP6 and 8.5.x before 8.5.1 FP5 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a cai:// URL containing a --launcher.library option that specifies a UNC share pathname for a DLL file, aka SPR PRAD82YJW2.
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 confidenceIBM Lotus Notes contains an argument injection vulnerability where specially crafted cai:// URLs with the --launcher.library option can specify a UNC path to a malicious DLL file, leading to arbitrary code execution. This affects Notes 8.0.x before FP6 and 8.5.x before FP5.
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= 8.0.1= 8.0.2= 8.0.2.0= 8.0.2.1= 8.0.2.2= 8.0.2.3= 8.0.2.4= 8.0.2.5= 8.5.0.0= 8.5.0.1= 8.5.1.0CVSS 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
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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.
-
Locate IBM Lotus Notes installation directoryCheck the typical installation path (C:\Program Files\IBM\Lotus\Notes or C:\Program Files (x86)\IBM\Lotus\Notes) or search for 'notes.exe' on the system.Affected if IBM Lotus Notes software is present on the system.
-
Identify the installed Lotus Notes versionOpen the Lotus Notes client and navigate to Help > About IBM Lotus Notes, or right-click the notes.exe file and view Properties > Details to see the File Version. Alternatively, check the Windows registry under HKLM\Software\IBM\Lotus\Notes or HKLM\Software\Wow6432Node\IBM\Lotus\Notes for the 'Version' value.Affected if The version cannot be determined or does not match the installed product.
-
Compare installed version against affected rangesReview the version number obtained. Affected versions are: 8.0, 8.0.1, 8.0.2 (all subversions including .0 through .5), 8.5.0.0, 8.5.0.1, and 8.5.1.0. Note that versions 8.0.2 FP6 and later, and 8.5.1 FP5 and later are NOT affected.Affected if The installed version is 8.0.x before Fix Pack 6, or 8.5.x before Fix Pack 5, or matches any of the specific versions listed: 8.0, 8.0.1, 8.0.2, 8.0.2.0, 8.0.2.1, 8.0.2.2, 8.0.2.3, 8.0.2.4, 8.0.2.5, 8.5.0.0, 8.5.0.1, or 8.5.1.0.
-
Confirm cai:// URL protocol handler is activeThe cai:// protocol handler is enabled by default in vulnerable versions. This can be observed in Windows registry under HKCR\cai (or HKLM\Software\Classes\cai) where the protocol handler is registered. If the Lotus Notes client is installed, this handler is typically present and active.Affected if The cai:// protocol handler is registered and enabled on the system.
A user is affected if IBM Lotus Notes version 8.0.x before FP6 or 8.5.x before FP5 is installed, and the cai:// URL protocol handler (enabled by default) can be triggered to process specially crafted URLs with the --launcher.library option.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade IBM Lotus Notes to version 8.0.2 FP6, 8.5.1 FP5, or later to remediate this vulnerability. As an interim control, consider blocking or disabling cai:// URL handling in enterprise environments.
Lotus Notes 8.0.2 FP6 or later, or 8.5.1 FP5 or later
- Identify the current IBM Lotus Notes version in use (8.0.x or 8.5.x branch)
- For Lotus Notes 8.0.x users: Upgrade to version 8.0.2 with Fix Pack 6 (FP6) or later
- For Lotus Notes 8.5.x users: Upgrade to version 8.5.1 with Fix Pack 5 (FP5) or later
- Verify the upgrade by checking Help > About IBM Lotus Notes to confirm the installed version includes the security fix
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-0912 — 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-2011-0912 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