CVE-2012-1035
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 · uneditedAdaCore Ada Web Services (AWS) before 2.10.2 computes hash values for form parameters without restricting the ability to trigger hash collisions predictably, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) by sending many crafted parameters.
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 confidenceAdaCore Ada Web Services (AWS) versions before 2.10.2 use a predictable hash function for form parameter processing without hash randomization, allowing attackers to deliberately trigger hash collisions by sending crafted parameter sets. This causes excessive CPU consumption as the hash table degrades to O(n²) performance, 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<= 2.10.1= 2.10.0CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Determine Ada Web Services versionRun 'aws --version' or check the installed package metadata (e.g., dpkg -l adasql, apt list --installed, or rpm -qi ada-web-services). If AWS is embedded in a custom application, check the application's libraries or version file.Affected if The installed version is 2.10.0 or any version lower than 2.10.2 (e.g., 2.9.x, 2.8.x, etc.)
-
Confirm HTTP form parameter processing is in useInspect the application source code or configuration for handling of HTTP form parameters (e.g., form parsing, parameter extraction from POST requests). This is typically enabled by default in AWS when handling HTML forms.Affected if The application processes incoming HTTP form parameters (POST data with application/x-www-form-urlencoded or multipart/form-data content types). This is the default behavior for web applications using AWS.
-
Determine if the AWS service is network-accessibleCheck whether the AWS-based web service is bound to a network interface and port that accepts external HTTP requests. Review firewall rules, network configuration, or service binding settings (e.g., netstat -tlnp | grep aws, or check the service's configuration file).Affected if The service listens on a publicly accessible IP address or any interface other than localhost, allowing attackers to send crafted HTTP requests directly to the service.
You are affected if your installed Ada Web Services version is 2.10.0 or any version below 2.10.2 AND your service accepts HTTP form parameter input over the network.
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 Ada Web Services to version 2.10.2 or later which implements hash randomization. If upgrade is not immediately feasible, consider placing a reverse proxy with rate limiting in front of the service to mitigate mass hash collision attacks.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-1035 — 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-2012-1035 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