CVE-2011-1846
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 · uneditedIBM DB2 9.5 before FP7 and 9.7 before FP4 on Linux, UNIX, and Windows does not properly revoke role membership from groups, which allows remote authenticated users to execute non-DDL statements by leveraging previous inherited possession of a role, a different vulnerability than CVE-2011-0757. NOTE: some of these details are obtained from third party information.
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 DB2 versions 9.5 before FP7 and 9.7 before FP4 fail to properly revoke role membership from groups. When a user's group membership is removed from a role, the system does not fully revoke the inherited privileges, allowing authenticated users to continue executing non-DDL statements using previously inherited role permissions.
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<= 9.5= 9.5<= 9.7= 9.7CVSS 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
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/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.
-
Check installed DB2 versionRun 'db2level' from a DB2 command prompt or query SELECT * FROM SYSIBMADM.SYSENVIRONMENTAL_INFO WHERE NAME = 'DB2_VERSION'Affected if The version is 9.5 or 9.7 and the fix pack is below FP7 for 9.5 or below FP4 for 9.7
-
Identify active role grantsQuery SYSCAT.ROLEAUTH to see current role authorization grants: SELECT GRANTEE, ROLENAME, ROLEID FROM SYSCAT.ROLEAUTH WHERE GRANTORTYPE IN ('G', 'U')Affected if There are roles granted to users or groups that may have had group membership changed
-
Check for role membership from groupsQuery SYSCAT.ROLEAUTH where GRANTEE is a group type (GRANTORTYPE = 'G'), and cross-reference with actual group membership in SYSIBMSCHEMAS or OS-level groupsAffected if Roles are granted to groups and users may have been members of those groups whose membership was subsequently removed
-
Review role privilege inheritanceQuery SELECT GRANTEE, ROLENAME, PRIVILEGE FROM SYSCAT.ROLEAUTH to see privileges associated with active role grantsAffected if Users retain role-derived privileges after their group membership in those roles was removed
A user is affected if they run DB2 version 9.5 before Fix Pack 7 or 9.7 before Fix Pack 4 and have users who had group membership in roles that was subsequently removed, as those users may still hold inherited role privileges.
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 IBM DB2 to version 9.5 Fix Pack 7 or 9.7 Fix Pack 4 or later to address the improper role membership revocation.
- Consultation2.0 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 $4,480.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-1846 — 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-2011-1846 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