CVE-2012-0843
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 · unediteduzbl: Information disclosure via world-readable cookies storage file
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 confidenceuzbl browser stores cookies in a file with world-readable permissions (e.g., 0644), allowing any local user on the system to read sensitive cookie data including session tokens and authentication credentials.
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= 8.0= 9.0all versionsCVSS 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
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 if uzbl browser is installedRun 'which uzbl' or check your package manager for the uzbl packageAffected if The uzbl browser is present on the system
-
Locate the cookie storage fileSearch for files named 'cookies' or 'cookie' in the uzbl configuration directory (typically ~/.uzbl/ or similar user directories)Affected if A cookie storage file exists in the uzbl user directory
-
Inspect file permissions on the cookie fileRun 'ls -la' on the cookie file path found in the previous step and check the permission bitsAffected if The file permissions show world-readability (e.g., 0644, 0640 with group read, or any permission containing 'r--r--r--' pattern)
-
Verify other potential cookie filesCheck for any additional cookie-related files in uzbl directories that may have been created over timeAffected if Any cookie file under uzbl directories has permissive (world-readable) permissions
A user is affected if uzbl browser is installed and any cookie storage file in its user directory has permissions that allow reading by other users on the system (e.g., permissions ending in 4 or showing 'r--' for others).
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 dataFix the cookie storage file permissions to restrict access to only the owner user (e.g., chmod 600) and ensure any new cookie files are created with restrictive permissions.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing0.5 h
- Review / QA0.5 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-0843 — 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-2012-0843 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