CVE-2011-3225
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 · uneditedThe SMB File Server component in Apple Mac OS X 10.7 before 10.7.2 does not prevent all guest users from accessing the share point record of a guest-restricted folder, which allows remote attackers to bypass intended browsing restrictions by leveraging access to the nobody account.
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 confidenceThe SMB file server in Mac OS X 10.7.x before 10.7.2 contained a vulnerability where the 'nobody' guest account could access share point records of folders that should have been restricted to guest users, allowing remote attackers to bypass intended browsing restrictions on SMB shares.
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= 10.7.0= 10.7.1= 10.7.0= 10.7.1CVSS 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
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
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 Mac OS X versionRun 'sw_vers -productVersion' or select 'About This Mac' from the Apple menu to view the installed OS versionAffected if Version is 10.7.0 or 10.7.1 (the only affected versions)
-
Verify SMB service is runningCheck if SMB sharing is enabled by looking at System Preferences > Sharing > File Sharing, or run 'smbstatus' in Terminal to see active SMB connectionsAffected if SMB file sharing is enabled and running
-
Confirm guest SMB access is enabledIn System Preferences > Sharing > File Sharing > Options, verify 'Share files and folders using SMB' is checked, and look for guest access configuration in /etc/smb.conf or via 'testparm -s' outputAffected if Guest access ('Allow guests to connect' or 'nobody' user mapping) is enabled for SMB shares
-
Identify SMB shares with access restrictionsRun 'sudo smbpasswd -L -a nobody' to check guest account status, and review SMB share definitions in /etc/smb.conf or via 'net share' command to see which shares have user-only access restrictionsAffected if There exist SMB shares configured to restrict access to specific users while guest access is simultaneously enabled
User is affected if running Mac OS X or Mac OS X Server 10.7.0 or 10.7.1 with SMB sharing enabled and guest account access permitted on shares that should restrict guest browsing.
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 Mac OS X to 10.7.2 or later to obtain the fix, or disable guest access to SMB shares if guest access is not required.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,912.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-3225 — 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-2011-3225 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