CVE-2012-1578
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 · uneditedMultiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in MediaWiki 1.17.x before 1.17.3 and 1.18.x before 1.18.2 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of users with the block permission for requests that (1) block a user via a request to the Block module or (2) unblock a user via a request to the Unblock module.
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 confidenceCSRF vulnerability in MediaWiki's Block and Unblock modules allows attackers with block permission to have their authentication hijacked, enabling unauthorized block/unblock actions on other users. The modules lack proper anti-CSRF token validation.
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= 1.17= 1.17.0= 1.17.1= 1.17.2= 1.18= 1.18.0= 1.18.1CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/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 installed MediaWiki versionLocate the MediaWiki version file or check includes/DefaultSettings.php for the $wgVersion variable. Common paths include /var/www/wiki/includes/DefaultSettings.php or within the MediaWiki installation directory.Affected if The installed version is 1.17.0, 1.17.1, 1.17.2, 1.18.0, or 1.18.1 (exact matches to the affected versions listed).
-
Confirm block permission is enabledCheck if any user or user group has the 'block' permission. This is typically configured in LocalSettings.php via $wgGroupPermissions or through the Special:ListGroupRights page in the wiki.Affected if Users with block permission exist and can access Special:Block or Special:Unblock pages.
-
Verify CSRF token validation exists for block/unblock actionsInspect the PHP code handling block and unblock operations. Look for token validation in the SpecialBlock.php and SpecialUnblock.php files, specifically checking for presence of $wgRequest->getToken() or similar CSRF token checks before performing block actions.Affected if No CSRF token validation is found in the block/unblock code modules - the vulnerability exists when these modules lack anti-CSRF token checks.
You are affected if your MediaWiki version matches 1.17.0-1.17.2 or 1.18.0-1.18.1 AND users with block permission exist AND the block/unblock modules lack CSRF token validation.
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 MediaWiki to version 1.17.3 or 1.18.2 or later which contains the CSRF protection for Block/Unblock modules. If upgrading is not immediately possible, consider using CSRF tokens for these modules as a manual patch.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-1578 — 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-2012-1578 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