CVE-2012-3309
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 · uneditedCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the account-creation panel in IBM InfoSphere Guardium 8.2 and earlier, when the CSRF filtering (aka csrf_status) feature is disabled, allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that create administrative accounts.
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 confidenceCross-site request forgery vulnerability in IBM InfoSphere Guardium 8.2 and earlier allows remote attackers to create administrative accounts by tricking authenticated administrators into visiting malicious pages, but only when the CSRF filtering (csrf_status) feature is disabled.
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<= 8.2= 8.00= 8.01CVSS 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.
-
Check installed Guardium versionAccess the Guardium command line or web interface and retrieve the product version information. Common methods: run 'guardium_version' command via CLI, or check the web UI under 'System Administration' > 'System Info' > 'Version'.Affected if The installed version is 8.00, 8.01, or any version 8.2 and earlier.
-
Verify CSRF filtering configuration statusLocate the csrf_status configuration setting in the Guardium administrative interface or configuration files. This is typically found in the Security Settings or System Configuration panel of the web UI, or may be queryable via CLI command such as 'grdctl get csrf_status' or by examining theGuardium configuration database.Affected if The csrf_status feature is set to DISABLED or is not explicitly enabled.
-
Confirm vulnerability conditionCross-reference both findings: if the version falls within <= 8.2 AND csrf_status is disabled, the environment is vulnerable to CVE-2012-3309.Affected if Version is 8.2 or earlier AND csrf_status filtering is disabled (the CSRF protection is not active).
The environment is affected by CVE-2012-3309 if running IBM InfoSphere Guardium version 8.2 or earlier (8.00, 8.01) with the CSRF filtering (csrf_status) feature disabled.
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 dataEnable the CSRF filtering (csrf_status) feature in the IBM InfoSphere Guardium administrative interface to prevent CSRF attacks on the account creation panel.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-3309 — 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-2012-3309 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