CVE-2012-3334
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 · uneditedStack-based buffer overflow in IBM Informix Dynamic Server (IDS) 11.50 before 11.50.xC9W2 and 11.70 before 11.70.xC5 allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary code via crafted arguments in a SET COLLATION statement.
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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflow in IBM Informix Dynamic Server (IDS) allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary code via crafted arguments in a SET COLLATION statement. The vulnerability affects versions 11.50 before 11.50.xC9W2 and 11.70 before 11.70.xC5.
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= 11.50= 11.50.xc1= 11.50.xc2= 11.50.xc3= 11.50.xc3w1= 11.50.xc4= 11.50.xc4w1= 11.50.xc5= 11.50.xc5w2= 11.50.xc5w3= 11.50.xc5w4= 11.50.xc6CVSS 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
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
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 IBM Informix Dynamic Server versionRun 'onstat -' or check the informix version file typically located in $INFORMIXDIR/etc/onconfig, or execute 'dbaccess -version' from the Informix bin directoryAffected if The reported version is 11.50.xC9 or earlier, or 11.70.xC4 or earlier (versions before 11.50.xC9W2 or 11.70.xC5)
-
Confirm SET COLLATION feature is accessibleVerify the SET COLLATION SQL statement can be executed. Log into the database as an authenticated user and attempt: SET COLLATION to '<value>'. Check if the feature is enabled in the IDS configuration files (onconfig)Affected if The SET COLLATION statement executes without error, indicating the feature is available in the environment
-
Check remote access configurationReview the sqlhosts file and onconfig for network listener settings. Look for NETTYPE configurations and verify if remote connections are enabled. Check if the $INFORMIXDIR/etc/sqlhosts contains entries other than 'local'Affected if Remote network listeners are configured and enabled, allowing remote authenticated connections to the database
-
Verify authentication methodExamine the onconfig file for USEOSTIME, USELASTCOMMIT, and authentication settings. Check if external authentication (LDAP, PAM) or built-in Informix authentication is in use. Review $INFORMIXDIR/etc/hosts.equiv or $INFORMIXDIR/etc/hosts.allowAffected if Remote users can authenticate to the Informix instance (whether via native IDS auth or external auth)
You are affected if you run IBM Informix Dynamic Server version 11.50 before 11.50.xC9W2 or 11.70 before 11.70.xC5, and remote authenticated users can execute SET COLLATION statements against the database.
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.
dbcve · scopedApply vendor patches: upgrade IDS 11.50 to 11.50.xC9W2 or later, or upgrade IDS 11.70 to 11.70.xC5 or later. Consider network segmentation and restricting database access to trusted users only until patching is complete.
IBM Informix Dynamic Server 11.50.xC9W2 or later (for 11.50.x versions); IBM Informix Dynamic Server 11.70.xC5 or later (for 11.70.x versions)
- Verify current Informix Dynamic Server version using 'onstat -' or 'oninit -version' command
- For IDS 11.50.x versions: Upgrade to 11.50.xC9W2 or later (11.50.xC9W2 is the minimum fixed version)
- For IDS 11.70.x versions: Upgrade to 11.70.xC5 or later (11.70.xC5 is the minimum fixed version)
- Obtain the appropriate fix pack from IBM Fix Central (https://www-945.ibm.com/support/fixcentral/)
- Backup the current IDS environment including onconfig, sqlhosts, and all data before applying the upgrade
- Apply the upgrade in a test environment first to verify compatibility
- After upgrade, verify the version using 'onstat -' to confirm the fix is applied
- Restrict access to trusted authenticated users only as a defense-in-depth measure
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-3334 — 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-2012-3334 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