CVE-2012-1558
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 · uneditedyaSSL CyaSSL before 2.0.8 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference and application crash) via a crafted X.509 certificate.
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 confidenceyaSSL CyaSSL before version 2.0.8 contains a NULL pointer dereference vulnerability when parsing crafted X.509 certificates. A remote attacker can send a specially malformed certificate to trigger the dereference, causing the application to crash and 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<= 2.0.6= 0.2.0= 0.3.0= 0.4.0= 0.5.0= 0.5.5= 0.6.0= 0.6.2= 0.6.3= 0.8.0= 0.9.0= 0.9.6CVSS 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.
-
Identify yaSSL/CyaSSL installationRun 'yaSSL --version' or check library binary metadata using 'strings' or a hex viewer for version strings like 'CyaSSL' or 'yaSSL'. If linked statically, inspect the application's dependencies or binaries for the library version string.Affected if The version string returned matches any of these: 0.2.0, 0.3.0, 0.4.0, 0.5.0, 0.5.5, 0.6.0, 0.6.2, 0.6.3, 0.8.0, 0.9.0, 0.9.6, or any version <= 2.0.6 (including 2.0.0 through 2.0.6).
-
Compare installed version to affected rangesIf a version number is found, compare it against the affected list: versions 0.2.0, 0.3.0, 0.4.0, 0.5.0, 0.5.5, 0.6.0, 0.6.2, 0.6.3, 0.8.0, 0.9.0, 0.9.6, and any release <= 2.0.6.Affected if The installed version is any of the versions listed in the affected list.
-
Verify X.509 certificate parsing is in useReview application configuration and code to determine if yaSSL/CyaSSL is used to parse X.509 certificates, such as during TLS handshake, certificate validation, or any SSL/TLS server/client operation that processes certificates from remote sources.Affected if The application uses yaSSL/CyaSSL to process X.509 certificates from untrusted sources such as remote TLS connections.
You are affected if your environment runs any version of yaSSL/CyaSSL listed in the affected versions and that library processes X.509 certificates from remote connections.
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 yaSSL CyaSSL to version 2.0.8 or later. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, implement certificate validation boundaries and consider input filtering to reject malformed certificates before they reach the library.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-1558 — 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-2012-1558 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