CVE-2012-0221
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 FactoryTalk (FT) RNADiagReceiver service in Rockwell Automation Allen-Bradley FactoryTalk CPR9 through SR5 and RSLogix 5000 17 through 20 does not properly handle the return value from an unspecified function, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (service outage) via a crafted packet.
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 confidenceThe FactoryTalk RNADiagReceiver service fails to properly validate or handle the return value from an unspecified function within its codebase. When processing network packets, this improper handling causes an unhandled error condition or exception that crashes the service, 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= cpr9= cpr9_sr5= 17= 18= 19= 20CVSS 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
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Identify if FactoryTalk RNADiagReceiver is installedCheck the Windows services list for 'RNADiagReceiver' or look for FactoryTalk installation in Program Files/Rockwell SoftwareAffected if RNADiagReceiver service is present on the system
-
Check FactoryTalk versionLook in FactoryTalk Administration Console or check registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Rockwell Software\FactoryTalk for version informationAffected if Version equals cpr9 or cpr9_sr5
-
Identify if Rslogix 5000 is installedCheck Program Files/Rockwell Software/RSLogix 5000 folder or look for RSLogix 5000 entry in Add/Remove ProgramsAffected if Rslogix 5000 version 17, 18, 19, or 20 is installed
-
Verify RNADiagReceiver service statusOpen Services control panel and check if the RNADiagReceiver service exists and its current status (Running/Stopped)Affected if RNADiagReceiver service is installed and running (vulnerability requires the service to be active)
-
Check network exposure of RNADiagReceiver portUse netstat -an to identify which ports RNADiagReceiver is listening on and determine if accessible from untrusted networksAffected if RNADiagReceiver port is bound to accessible network interfaces and reachable from untrusted remote attackers
Your environment is affected if you have FactoryTalk RNADiagReceiver (cpr9 or cpr9_sr5) or Rslogix 5000 (v17-v20) installed with the RNADiagReceiver service running and exposed to network traffic.
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 dataRestrict network access to the RNADiagReceiver service port using firewalls or network segmentation to limit exposure to untrusted remote attackers; contact Rockwell Automation for any available patches.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-0221 — 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-2012-0221 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