CVE-2012-3514
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 · uneditedOCaml Xml-Light Library before r234 computes hash values without restricting the ability to trigger hash collisions predictably, which allows context-dependent attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) 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 confidenceThe OCaml Xml-Light library before revision r234 computes hash values without restricting the ability to trigger hash collisions predictably. An attacker can exploit this by providing specially crafted input that causes predictable hash collisions, leading to excessive CPU consumption and denial of service.
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<= r233CVSS 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the installed Xml-Light version or revisionCheck the source code revision number, OPAM package info, or library metadata for the Ocaml Xml-Light library. Look for version identifiers or check the git history if the source is available.Affected if The revision number is r233 or earlier, or no revision number is found (indicating an old installation)
-
Locate the hash computation codeInspect the Xml-Light library source files, specifically looking for hash-related functions in the library. In OCaml, this would typically be in a module handling string interning or similar data structures.Affected if The library uses a hash function that does not include randomization or salt for hash computation
-
Verify XML input sourceExamine the application code that uses Xml-Light to determine where XML data originates. Check if XML is parsed from HTTP requests, file uploads, user input, or network sources.Affected if The application processes XML from untrusted or external sources without validation
-
Check for hash collision mitigationReview the application or library code to see if any rate limiting, input validation, or hash randomization is implemented around XML parsing operations.Affected if No hash randomization, input validation on XML content size, or rate limiting is present
The environment is affected if the installed Xml-Light library revision is r233 or earlier AND the application processes XML from untrusted external sources without hash randomization or input validation mitigations in place.
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 dataUpgrade OCaml Xml-Light library to revision r234 or later. If upgrading is not immediately possible, implement rate limiting or input validation on XML data from untrusted sources to mitigate hash collision attacks.
- 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-2012-3514 — 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-2012-3514 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