CVE-2012-1256
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 single sign-on (SSO) implementation in EasyVista before 2010.1.1.89 allows remote attackers to bypass authentication via a modified url_account parameter, in conjunction with a valid login name in the SSPI_HEADER parameter, to index.php.
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 confidenceAuthentication bypass vulnerability in EasyVista's SSO implementation allows remote attackers to bypass authentication by modifying the url_account parameter while supplying a valid login name in the SSPI_HEADER parameter to index.php. This affects versions prior to 2010.1.1.89.
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<= 2010CVSS 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/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.
-
Identify EasyVista versionLocate and inspect the EasyVista installation to find the version number. This is typically visible in the product UI, an about page, or a version file within the installation directory. Compare the installed version to the affected range (versions prior to 2010.1.1.89).Affected if The installed EasyVista version is 2010.x or earlier and is below 2010.1.1.89
-
Confirm SSO module is enabledCheck the EasyVista configuration to determine if the Single Sign-On (SSO) feature is active. This is usually configurable in the system settings, admin panel, or authentication configuration files.Affected if SSO is enabled and the version is vulnerable
-
Verify index.php accessibilityDetermine if the web server exposes the index.php file used by EasyVista. This endpoint is the entry point where the vulnerable url_account and SSPI_HEADER parameters are processed.Affected if index.php is accessible via the web and SSO is enabled on a vulnerable version
-
Inspect SSO parameter handlingReview any available logs, configurations, or application code that shows how the url_account and SSPI_HEADER parameters are processed during SSO authentication requests.Affected if The application accepts and processes these parameters without proper validation when SSO is active
You are affected if EasyVista version is 2010.x or earlier (below 2010.1.1.89) and the SSO module is enabled with index.php accessible.
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 EasyVista to version 2010.1.1.89 or later. Until then, implement additional access controls on the index.php endpoint and monitor for suspicious SSO requests with manipulated parameters.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-1256 — 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-2012-1256 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