CVE-2012-2184
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 · uneditedSession fixation vulnerability in IBM Maximo Asset Management 7.1 through 7.5, as used in SmartCloud Control Desk, Tivoli Asset Management for IT, Tivoli Service Request Manager, Maximo Service Desk, and Change and Configuration Management Database (CCMDB), allows remote attackers to hijack web sessions via unspecified vectors.
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 · moderate confidenceSession fixation vulnerability in IBM Maximo Asset Management 7.1-7.5 allows remote attackers to set or predict session identifiers before user authentication, then hijack the session after the user logs in. The vulnerability affects multiple IBM products using the Maximo platform, enabling unauthorized session takeover via unspecified vectors.
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= 6.0= 7.0= 7.1.0.0= 7.5.0.0= 6.2= 7.0= 6.0= 6.2= 7.0= 7.1= 7.2= 7.0CVSS 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 the installed IBM Maximo product and versionAccess the system information or about page in the Maximo application (typically via Help > System Information or /maximo/about.jsp), or check the version.xml file in the installation directoryAffected if The installed version matches one of: IBM Change And Configuration Management Database 6.0 or 7.0; IBM Maximo Asset Management 7.1.0.0 or 7.5.0.0; IBM Maximo Service Desk 6.2; IBM Smartcloud Control Desk 7.0; IBM Tivoli Asset Management For It 6.0, 6.2, 7.0, 7.1, or 7.2; IBM Tivoli Service Request M
-
Verify if session IDs are regenerated after authenticationCreate a new session, capture the session ID before login, authenticate as a valid user, then check if the session ID changes after successful authenticationAffected if The session ID remains the same before and after successful user authentication (session is not regenerated)
-
Test for session fixation via URL parameter injectionAttempt to access the application with a known session ID appended to the login URL (for example, /login.jsp?JSESSIONID=ATTACKERCONTROLLED), then authenticate and verify if that session ID remains activeAffected if The application accepts and maintains a session ID provided by the client before authentication, and that session remains valid after login
Your environment is affected if you are running one of the listed product versions AND the application does not regenerate session identifiers upon successful authentication.
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 dataRegenerate session identifiers upon successful authentication and implement secure session ID generation with proper validation to prevent attackers from pre-establishing session IDs.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-2184 — 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-2012-2184 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