Websphere MqApplication · Ibm

CVE-2012-2201

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2022-09-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
IBM WebSphere MQ 7.1 is vulnerable to a denial of service, caused by an error when handling user ids. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability to bypass the security configuration setup on a SVRCONN channel and flood the queue manager.

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 confidence

IBM WebSphere MQ 7.1 contains a vulnerability in the SVRCONN channel where improper handling of user IDs allows remote attackers to bypass security configurations. This enables an attacker to flood the queue manager with requests, causing denial of service conditions.

MitigationApply the IBM WebSphere MQ 7.1 fix pack that addresses this vulnerability (contact IBM for specific patch availability). Additionally, restrict SVRCONN channel access through channel authentication records and firewall rules to limit exposure.

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
Websphere MqApplication
Affected:= 7.1

CVSS 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
None
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm WebSphere MQ version
    Run 'dspmqver' command or check the installation directory for version information. On Windows, check the program files IBM WebSphere MQ version. On Linux/UNIX, run 'mqversion' or inspect /opt/mqm/ install.cfg
    Affected if The installed version is exactly 7.1 (any fix pack within the 7.1 release line)
  2. Identify SVRCONN channel definitions
    Use the runmqsc command to list channel definitions: 'DISPLAY CHANNEL(SVRCONN)' or check the queue manager's channel configuration files for any defined SVRCONN type channels
    Affected if Any SVRCONN channels are defined in the queue manager configuration
  3. Check SVRCONN channel accessibility
    Examine the SVRCONN channel attributes, specifically the MCAUSER setting and any CHLAUTH (channel authentication) rules. Use 'DISPLAY CHANNEL(SVRCONN) ALL' in runmqsc to view complete configuration
    Affected if SVRCONN channels are configured with default MCAUSER (blank) or allow connections from untrusted network addresses without strict CHLAUTH rules
  4. Verify listener status
    Check if a listener is running that accepts connections on the SVRCONN channels. Use 'DISPLAY LSSTATUS(*)' and 'DISPLAY CHSTATUS(*)' commands in runmqsc to see active listeners and channel statuses
    Affected if A listener is active and accepting connections on ports that SVRCONN channels use

You are affected if you run WebSphere MQ version 7.1 with accessible SVRCONN channels that lack strict channel authentication controls.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply the IBM WebSphere MQ 7.1 fix pack that addresses this vulnerability (contact IBM for specific patch availability). Additionally, restrict SVRCONN channel access through channel authentication records and firewall rules to limit exposure.

Fix this in Websphere Mq Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,750
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-2201 — 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

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2012-2201 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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