CVE-2012-1713
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 · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in the Java Runtime Environment (JRE) component in Oracle Java SE 7 update 4 and earlier, 6 update 32 and earlier, 5 update 35 and earlier, 1.4.2_37 and earlier, and JavaFX 2.1 and earlier allows remote attackers to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability via unknown vectors related to 2D.
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 confidenceCVE-2012-1713 is a critical unspecified vulnerability in the Java Runtime Environment's 2D graphics component affecting Java SE 7u4 and earlier, 6u32 and earlier, 5u35 and earlier, and JavaFX 2.1 and earlier. The flaw allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via unknown vectors in the 2D subsystem, achieving complete compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
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<= 1.7.0<= 1.6.0<= 1.7.0<= 1.6.0<= 1.5.0<= 1.4.2_37<= 1.5.0<= 1.4.2_37<= 2.1CVSS 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
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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 Java Runtime Environment versionOpen a terminal and run 'java -version' or 'java -fullversion' to display the installed JRE version numberAffected if The version displayed is 1.7.0 or earlier, 1.6.0 update 32 or earlier, 1.5.0 update 35 or earlier, or 1.4.2 update 37 or earlier
-
Identify installed Java Development Kit versionRun 'javac -version' in a terminal to check the installed JDK versionAffected if The version is 1.7.0 or earlier, 1.6.0 update 32 or earlier, 1.5.0 update 35 or earlier, or 1.4.2 update 37 or earlier
-
Check for JavaFX installation and versionLocate JavaFX runtime files or check program listings for JavaFX components; version information is typically found in the JavaFX release notes or system registryAffected if JavaFX 2.1 or earlier is installed
-
Verify Java browser plugin statusCheck web browser settings for the Java plug-in (Java Plug-in 2) or use the Java Control Panel to view enabled browser pluginsAffected if The Java browser plugin is enabled in any web browser
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade to Java SE 7 Update 5 or later, 6 Update 33 or later, or 5 Update 36 or later; alternatively, apply Oracle Critical Patch Update June 2012. Disable Java browser plugins where possible until patching is complete.
Java 7 Update 5+, Java 6 Update 33+, Java 5 Update 36+, Java 1.4.2_38+, JavaFX 2.2+
- 1. Identify all Java installations on the system using 'java -version' and checking JAVA_HOME environment variable
- 2. For JDK 1.7.0: upgrade to JDK 7 Update 5 (1.7.0_05) or later
- 3. For JDK 1.6.0: upgrade to JDK 6 Update 33 (1.6.0_33) or later
- 4. For JDK 1.5.0: upgrade to JDK 5 Update 36 (1.5.0_36) or later
- 5. For JDK 1.4.2: upgrade to JDK 1.4.2_38 or later
- 6. For JavaFX 2.1: upgrade to JavaFX 2.2 or later which includes the security fix
- 7. Verify the upgrade by running 'java -version' and confirming the updated patch level
- 8. Test any critical applications to ensure compatibility with the new Java version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2012-1713 — 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 sources- www.oracle.com
- lists.opensuse.org
- lists.opensuse.org
- lists.opensuse.org
- lists.opensuse.org
- mail.openjdk.java.net
- marc.info
- rhn.redhat.com
- rhn.redhat.com
- rhn.redhat.com
- rhn.redhat.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- security.gentoo.org
- www.ibm.com
- www.mandriva.com
- www.mandriva.com
- www.oracle.com
- www.securityfocus.com
- oval.cisecurity.org
- nvd.nist.gov
Practitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2012-1713 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