CVE-2012-1178
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 msn_oim_report_to_user function in oim.c in the MSN protocol plugin in libpurple in Pidgin before 2.10.2 allows remote servers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via an OIM message that lacks UTF-8 encoding.
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 confidenceThe msn_oim_report_to_user function in oim.c within the MSN protocol plugin in libpurple (Pidgin) fails to properly handle OIM messages that lack UTF-8 encoding. When a remote MSN server sends a malformed OIM message without proper UTF-8 encoding, the function attempts to process the invalid data, causing a null pointer dereference or memory corruption that leads to application crash (denial of service). The vulnerability affects Pidgin versions prior to 2.10.2.
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= 2.0.0= 2.0.1= 2.0.2= 2.1.0= 2.1.1= 2.2.0= 2.2.1= 2.2.2= 2.3.0= 2.3.1= 2.4.0CVSS 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.
-
Verify Pidgin is installedCheck for Pidgin installation by running 'pidgin --version' or checking for the executable at common paths like /usr/bin/pidgin, C:\Program Files\Pidgin\pidgin.exe, or via package manager (dpkg -l | grep pidgin, rpm -qa | grep pidgin)Affected if Pidgin is not installed on the system
-
Determine installed Pidgin versionRun 'pidgin --version' or check via package manager: 'dpkg -l | grep pidgin' (Debian) or 'rpm -qa | grep pidgin' (RHEL). Compare the version number to the affected range (all versions <= 2.10.1, including 2.0.0 through 2.4.0)Affected if The installed version is 2.10.1 or earlier, or specifically 2.0.0, 2.0.1, 2.0.2, 2.1.0, 2.1.1, 2.2.0, 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.3.0, 2.3.1, or 2.4.0
-
Check if MSN protocol plugin is loaded or configuredOpen Pidgin and go to Accounts > Manage Accounts, or inspect configuration files in ~/.purple/accounts.xml (Linux) or %APPDATA%\.purple\accounts.xml (Windows) for entries with protocol 'prpl-msn' or 'MSN'Affected if Any MSN account is configured or the MSN protocol plugin (prpl-msn) is enabled in Pidgin
The system is affected if Pidgin version 2.10.1 or earlier is installed AND an MSN account is configured or the MSN protocol plugin is in use, as the crash occurs when processing malformed OIM messages from the MSN server.
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 Pidgin 2.10.2 or later which includes proper input validation for UTF-8 encoding in the MSN protocol plugin. Until upgrade, avoid connecting to MSN servers or disable the MSN protocol plugin.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-1178 — 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-2012-1178 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