CVE-2012-0745
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 getpwnam function in IBM AIX 5.3, 6.1, and 7.1 and VIOS 2.1.0.10 through 2.2.1.3 does not properly interact with customer-extended LDAP user filtering, which allows local users to gain privileges via unspecified vectors.
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 getpwnam function in IBM AIX 5.3, 6.1, 7.1 and VIOS 2.1.0.10-2.2.1.3 does not properly handle customer-extended LDAP user filtering, allowing local users to bypass proper user lookup validation and gain elevated privileges through unspecified vectors.
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= 5.3= 6.1= 7.1= 2.1.0.10= 2.1.2.12= 2.1.2.13= 2.1.3.10= 2.2.0.10= 2.2.0.11= 2.2.0.12= 2.2.0.13= 2.2.1.0= 2.2.1.1= 2.2.1.3CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/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 AIX or VIOS versionRun 'oslevel -s' on the system to obtain the full version stringAffected if The version matches AIX 5.3, 6.1, or 7.1, or VIOS 2.1.0.10 through 2.2.1.3 (any of the listed affected versions)
-
Determine if LDAP user authentication is enabledCheck the LDAP configuration by examining /etc/security/ldap/ldap.cfg or running 'lssec -f /etc/security/ldap/ldap.cfg -s ldap'Affected if LDAP is configured for user lookups (the system uses LDAP for getpwnam calls)
-
Check for custom or extended LDAP user filtersReview the LDAP configuration files in /etc/security/ldap/ for custom user filter definitions, or examine the ldap.cfg file for non-standard 'userFilter' or 'filter' entriesAffected if Custom or customer-extended LDAP user filters are defined in the configuration
-
Verify getpwnam behavior with LDAP usersAttempt to resolve a known LDAP user account using the 'getent passwd <username>' command or the 'id <username>' commandAffected if User lookup returns unexpected results or fails to properly validate the user against the configured LDAP filter
You are affected if your AIX/VIOS version matches the listed affected versions AND LDAP is configured with custom user filters that could be exploited through getpwnam.
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 dataApply IBM's applicable patches for this vulnerability. If patches are unavailable for end-of-life versions, consider reviewing/disabling custom LDAP user filters or migrating to supported AIX/VIOS versions.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,792.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-0745 — 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-2012-0745 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