CVE-2011-4173
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 · uneditedCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Simple Machines Forum (SMF) 2.x before 2.0.1 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators or moderators via vectors involving image files, a different vulnerability than CVE-2011-3615. 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 · moderate confidenceCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Simple Machines Forum (SMF) 2.x before 2.0.1 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators or moderators via vectors involving image files.
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= 2.0CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Confirm SMF installationLook for Simple Machines Forum files on the server, typically in the web root. Check for the presence of SMF-specific directories such as 'Sources', 'Themes', or 'Packages', and the main index.php file.Affected if SMF is present on the server
-
Identify installed SMF versionOpen the file /Settings.php (or Settings.php in the SMF root directory) and locate the variable $smfVersion or $version. Alternatively, log into the admin control panel and check the version displayed in the footer or in Server Settings.Affected if The version is 2.0 or any 2.x version prior to 2.0.1
-
Verify admin/moderator access existsConfirm that administrator or moderator user accounts exist and that the admin control panel (/index.php?action=admin) is accessible.Affected if At least one admin or moderator account is active on the forum
-
Check image-related admin featuresNavigate to the admin control panel and locate sections related to avatar uploads, post ratings, or attachments where image files can be uploaded or managed by admins/moderators.Affected if Image upload or management features are accessible to admin/moderator accounts
If SMF version 2.0 or any 2.x version before 2.0.1 is installed and admin/moderator accounts with image-related functionality are accessible, the environment is vulnerable to CVE-2011-4173 CSRF attacks.
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 to SMF 2.0.1 or later which contains the CSRF fix. If immediate upgrade is not possible, implement anti-CSRF tokens on admin/moderator actions involving image uploads and consider disabling administrative features until patched.
- Consultation3.0 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 $4,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-4173 — 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-2011-4173 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