CVE-2011-3273
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 · uneditedMemory leak in Cisco IOS 15.0 through 15.1, when IPS or Zone-Based Firewall (aka ZBFW) is configured, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption or device crash) via vectors that trigger many session creation flows, aka Bug ID CSCti79848.
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 confidenceMemory leak in Cisco IOS versions 15.0 through 15.1 when IPS (Intrusion Prevention System) or Zone-Based Firewall (ZBFW) is configured. Remote attackers can trigger the leak by generating many session creation flows, causing memory exhaustion and potentially device crash, resulting in denial of service.
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= 15.0= 15.0m= 15.0sg= 15.0xa= 15.0xo= 15.1= 15.1gc= 15.1m= 15.1s= 15.1t= 15.1xbCVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Identify the Cisco IOS versionExecute 'show version' on the device CLI and locate the version string in the outputAffected if The version falls within 15.0 to 15.1 (including variants: 15.0, 15.0m, 15.0sg, 15.0xa, 15.0xo, 15.1, 15.1gc, 15.1m, 15.1s, 15.1t, 15.1xb)
-
Check if IPS (Intrusion Prevention System) is enabledExecute 'show ip ips' or 'show module' to verify if IPS signatures and inspection are activeAffected if IPS is configured and running on the device
-
Check if Zone-Based Firewall (ZBFW) is configuredExecute 'show zone-pair' or 'show policy-map type inspect' to verify ZBFW policies existAffected if Zone-Based Firewall policies are configured on the device
A device is affected if it runs Cisco IOS version 15.0 through 15.1 AND has either IPS or ZBFW features enabled, making it vulnerable to memory exhaustion from rapid session creation.
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 dataUpdate Cisco IOS to a patched version beyond 15.1. If immediate update is not possible, consider rate-limiting session creation or temporarily disabling IPS/ZBFW features if not critical, while planning the upgrade.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-3273 — 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-2011-3273 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