GitHubApplication
CVE-2012-2055
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 · uneditedGitHub Enterprise before 20120304 does not properly restrict the use of a hash to provide values for a model's attributes, which allows remote attackers to set the public_key[user_id] value via a modified URL for the public-key update form, related to a "mass assignment" vulnerability.
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 confidenceGitHub Enterprise before version 20120304 contains a mass assignment vulnerability where the application fails to properly restrict hash parameters for model attribute assignment. Attackers can manipulate the public_key[user_id] value via a modified URL on the public-key update form, potentially allowing unauthorized association of SSH keys with other user accounts.
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
GitHubApplication
< 20120304CVSS 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
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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 GitHub Enterprise versionAccess the GitHub Enterprise admin console or check the /setup and about page to find the installed version numberAffected if The displayed version is earlier than 20120304 (e.g., 20120202, 20111215, etc.)
-
Confirm public key management is enabledVerify that SSH public key management features are accessible to users via the GitHub web interface (account settings, SSH keys section)Affected if Users can access the public key upload/update form in the application
-
Check if mass assignment protection exists in the public key controllerExamine the source code or configuration of the public key update controller for presence of attr_accessible whitelist or strong parameters protection for the user_id attributeAffected if The public_key model or controller lacks attr_accessible/strong parameters protection for the user_id field, allowing arbitrary parameter assignment
-
Verify the user_id parameter is manipulableInspect the public key update form and attempt to submit with a modified public_key[user_id] parameter pointing to a different user IDAffected if The application accepts and processes a modified user_id parameter without rejecting it as unauthorized
The environment is affected if GitHub Enterprise version is earlier than 20120304 and the public key update form allows manipulation of the user_id parameter without proper mass assignment protection.
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 data20120304
Implement proper mass assignment protection using attr_accessible or strong parameters in the Rails application to whitelist allowed attributes, specifically protecting the user_id field from external assignment.
Fix this in GitHub
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-2055 — 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-2012-2055 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