dbcve.org
Enterprise VirtualizationApplication · Redhat

CVE-2012-3405

MEDIUM · 5.0 CVSS v2.0 Published 2014-02-10
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
59/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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
The vfprintf function in stdio-common/vfprintf.c in libc in GNU C Library (aka glibc) 2.14 and other versions does not properly calculate a buffer length, which allows context-dependent attackers to bypass the FORTIFY_SOURCE format-string protection mechanism and cause a denial of service (segmentation fault and crash) via a format string with a large number of format specifiers that triggers "desynchronization within the buffer size handling," a different vulnerability than CVE-2012-3404.

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 confidence

A buffer length calculation error in glibc's vfprintf function allows attackers to bypass FORTIFY_SOURCE format-string protections by using format strings with many format specifiers, causing desynchronization in buffer size handling and leading to segmentation faults and DoS.

MitigationUpdate glibc to a version where the buffer length calculation flaw in vfprintf is fixed. Recompile any statically linked applications against the updated library and verify FORTIFY_SOURCE protections are re-established.

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
Enterprise VirtualizationApplication
Affected:= 3.0
Ubuntu LinuxOperating system
Affected:= 8.04= 10.04= 11.04= 11.10= 12.04
Enterprise LinuxOperating system
Affected:= 6.0
GlibcFramework / library
Affected:= 2.14

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
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 checks

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

  1. Check installed glibc version
    Run `ldd --version` or inspect /lib/libc.so.6 using `strings /lib/libc.so.6 | grep 'GNU C Library'` to identify the installed glibc version
    Affected if The glibc version is 2.14 or lower (the version where the buffer length calculation flaw exists)
  2. Identify applications using FORTIFY_SOURCE protection
    Search application binaries or build configurations for FORTIFY_SOURCE flags (compile with `-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2` or check with `readelf -d <binary> | grep BIND_NOW` or use tools like checksec)
    Affected if Applications are compiled with FORTIFY_SOURCE and linked against a vulnerable glibc version, making them susceptible to the bypass
  3. Check for format-string handling in custom applications
    Review application source code or binaries for use of vfprintf-family functions (printf, fprintf, sprintf) with user-controlled format strings, especially those with many format specifiers
    Affected if Applications process format strings with numerous specifiers and rely on FORTIFY_SOURCE for protection against format string vulnerabilities
  4. Verify dynamic library linkage
    Use `ldd <executable>` on critical applications to confirm they link against the system glibc and identify the exact library version in use
    Affected if Applications dynamically link to a glibc version that is 2.14 or earlier

A system is affected if glibc version 2.14 or lower is installed AND applications compiled with FORTIFY_SOURCE protections are in use, as the vulnerability allows bypassing the format-string safeguards.

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

Update glibc to a version where the buffer length calculation flaw in vfprintf is fixed. Recompile any statically linked applications against the updated library and verify FORTIFY_SOURCE protections are re-established.

Fix this in Enterprise Virtualization Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing12.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
28.0 hours of engineering $4,760
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,616.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-3405 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2012-3405 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