CVE-2012-2147
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 · uneditedmunin-cgi-graph in Munin 2.0 rc4 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (disk or memory consumption) via many image requests with large values in the (1) size_x or (2) size_y parameters.
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 confidencemunin-cgi-graph in Munin 2.0 rc4 lacks proper input validation on the size_x and size_y parameters in image requests. Remote attackers can exploit this by sending numerous requests with extremely large parameter values, causing excessive disk or memory consumption leading to 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_rc4CVSS 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.
-
Check Munin installation and versionRun 'munin --version' or check package manager (dpkg -l | grep munin, rpm -qa | grep munin) to identify if Munin is installed and its exact versionAffected if Version is exactly 2.0_rc4
-
Verify munin-cgi-graph component is presentLocate the munin-cgi-graph executable: 'find /usr -name munin-cgi-graph' or check the Munin CGI directory (typically /usr/lib/cgi-bin/ or /var/www/cgi-bin/)Affected if munin-cgi-graph executable exists in the expected CGI directory
-
Confirm CGI graphing endpoint is enabledCheck web server configuration (Apache/Nginx) for CGI script execution enabled for munin-cgi-graph, or verify the CGI directory is accessible via web serverAffected if CGI endpoint is web-accessible and functional
-
Inspect current input validation configurationReview Munin CGI configuration files (typically in /etc/munin/) for any existing size_x/size_y parameter limits, or examine the munin-cgi-graph source code if accessible for validation logicAffected if No upper bounds or validation limits are configured for size_x and size_y parameters
-
Test for parameter validation weaknessSend a test HTTP request to the munin-cgi-graph endpoint with exaggerated size_x and size_y values (e.g., size_x=99999&size_y=99999) and observe if the application accepts them without error or limit enforcementAffected if Extremely large parameter values are accepted without validation or error
System is affected if Munin version is exactly 2.0_rc4 AND the munin-cgi-graph CGI endpoint is enabled and accessible without proper input validation bounds on size_x/size_y parameters.
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 dataImplement strict input validation and upper bounds on size_x and size_y parameters. Consider adding rate limiting and resource quotas for the CGI graphing endpoint to prevent resource exhaustion attacks.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-2147 — 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-2012-2147 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