CVE-2012-4621
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 Device Sensor feature in Cisco IOS 15.0 through 15.2 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device reload) via a DHCP packet, aka Bug ID CSCty96049.
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 confidenceThe Device Sensor feature in Cisco IOS versions 15.0 through 15.2 contains a vulnerability where specially crafted DHCP packets sent by remote attackers can cause the affected device to reload, resulting in denial of service. This is an unauthenticated, network-adjacent attack requiring no user interaction.
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= 15.0= 15.0\(1\)se= 15.1= 15.2CVSS 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
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Check the Cisco IOS versionExecute 'show version' on the device and locate the version number in the output (typically the first line)Affected if The version is 15.0, 15.0(1)se, 15.1, or 15.2 (these are the affected versions)
-
Verify if Device Sensor feature is enabledExecute 'show running-config | include device-sensor' or 'show device-sensor status' in privileged EXEC modeAffected if Device Sensor is enabled and the IOS version falls within the affected range (15.0-15.2)
-
Confirm the device processes DHCP trafficExecute 'show ip dhcp pool' or 'show ip dhcp binding' to verify DHCP is configured and active on the deviceAffected if DHCP is actively configured on the device and the above version and feature conditions are met, the device is vulnerable to the crafted DHCP packet attack
You are affected if your Cisco IOS version is 15.0, 15.0(1)se, 15.1, or 15.2 AND the Device Sensor feature is enabled on the device.
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 Cisco IOS to a version beyond 15.2 that contains the fix for CSCty96049. If immediate patching is not feasible, consider disabling the Device Sensor feature or implementing network segmentation to limit exposure to untrusted DHCP sources.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-4621 — 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-2012-4621 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