CVE-2012-3518
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 · uneditedThe networkstatus_parse_vote_from_string function in routerparse.c in Tor before 0.2.2.38 does not properly handle an invalid flavor name, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds read and daemon crash) via a crafted (1) vote document or (2) consensus document.
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 confidenceTor before 0.2.2.38 contains an out-of-bounds read vulnerability in the networkstatus_parse_vote_from_string function in routerparse.c. The function fails to properly validate flavor names when parsing vote or consensus documents, allowing remote attackers to crash the Tor daemon via specially crafted documents.
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<= 0.2.2.37CVSS 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 installed Tor versionRun 'tor --version' or check the package manager (dpkg -l tor, rpm -q tor, brew list tor)Affected if version is 0.2.2.37 or earlier
-
Confirm version is within affected rangeCompare installed version against the vulnerable range: all versions <= 0.2.2.37Affected if installed version is 0.2.2.37 or lower
-
Determine if Tor is configured as a relay or authorityCheck torrc configuration file (typically /etc/tor/torrc) for 'ORPort', 'DirPort', or 'V3AuthoritativeDirectory' directivesAffected if Tor is configured as a relay (with ORPort) or as a directory authority (with DirPort or V3AuthoritativeDirectory)
-
Verify network status document processing is activeCheck if Tor is running and has successfully fetched or is serving network status documents (check logs for 'networkstatus' or 'consensus' entries)Affected if Tor is actively parsing vote or consensus documents from the network
You are affected if running Tor version 0.2.2.37 or earlier AND the relay or authority function is enabled, allowing processing of vote/consensus documents from the network.
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 Tor to version 0.2.2.38 or later. Until upgrade is possible, consider restricting who can submit vote/consensus documents to trusted relays only.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
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 locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-3518 — 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-2012-3518 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