CVE-2012-3534
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 · uneditedGNU Gatekeeper before 3.1 does not limit the number of connections to the status port, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (connection and thread consumption) via a large number of connections.
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 confidenceGNU Gatekeeper before version 3.1 does not enforce connection limits on its status port, allowing remote attackers to exhaust server resources by establishing a large number of concurrent connections. This depletes available threads and memory, resulting in 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= 42.1= 13.2<= 3.1= 2.0.3= 2.0.4= 2.0.5= 2.0.6= 2.0.7= 2.0.8= 2.0.9= 2.2.0= 2.2.1= 2.2.2= 2.2.3CVSS 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.
-
Verify GNU Gatekeeper installation and versionRun 'gnugk --version' or check the installed package version using your system's package manager (e.g., 'rpm -q gnugk' or 'dpkg -l gnugk')Affected if The installed version is 3.1 or earlier, or matches any of these: 2.0.3, 2.0.4, 2.0.5, 2.0.6, 2.0.7, 2.0.8, 2.0.9, 2.2.0, 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.2.3
-
Locate the configuration fileFind the GNU Gatekeeper configuration file (commonly 'gatekeeper.ini', 'gnugk.ini', or in /etc/gnugk/)Affected if The configuration file exists and the status port section is present
-
Confirm status port is enabledIn the configuration file, check for [Status] section or 'StatusPort' directive. Look for 'Enable=1' or similar setting that activates the status portAffected if The status port is enabled (not disabled or set to 0) in the configuration
-
Check current status port bindingInspect the configuration for the status port number (typically port 7000 or 7001 by default) and verify it is listening with 'netstat -anp | grep <port>' or 'ss -tlnp | grep <port>'Affected if The status port is configured and actively listening for connections
You are affected if GNU Gatekeeper is running with a version 3.1 or earlier (or any of the specific versions 2.0.3-2.2.3) and the status port is enabled and accessible.
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 to GNU Gatekeeper 3.1 or later which implements connection limits. Until upgraded, restrict network access to the status port via firewall rules or disable the status port if not required.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-3534 — 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-2012-3534 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