CVE-2012-4690
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 · uneditedRockwell Automation Allen-Bradley MicroLogix controller 1100, 1200, 1400, and 1500; SLC 500 controller platform; and PLC-5 controller platform, when Static status is not enabled, allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service via messages that trigger modification of status bits.
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 confidenceThis is a denial of service vulnerability in Rockwell Automation Allen-Bradley programmable logic controllers (MicroLogix 1100/1200/1400/1500, SLC 500, and PLC-5). When the Static status feature is not enabled, remote attackers can send specially crafted messages that modify status bits, causing the controllers to enter a denial of service condition.
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= 1100= 1200= 1400= 1500all versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:M/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.
-
Identify controller model and firmware versionAccess the controller through RSLogix/Rockwell programming software or the controller's web interface (for MicroLogix 1100/1400). Navigate to the controller properties or system information to view the exact model number and firmware revision.Affected if Controller is a MicroLogix 1100, 1200, 1400, or 1500; or a PLC-5 or SLC 500 of any version.
-
Locate Static status configuration settingIn RSLogix 500 (for MicroLogix) or RSLogix 5 (for PLC-5) or RSLogix 500 (for SLC 500), open the controller properties. Look for a setting named 'Static Status', 'Static Mode', or similar under the controller configuration or communication settings.Affected if The Static status setting exists in the controller configuration and can be viewed.
-
Verify Static status is disabledExamine the current value of the Static status setting. If it is set to Disabled, Off, or Not Configured, the controller is vulnerable. The vulnerable condition is when Static status is NOT enabled.Affected if Static status feature is currently disabled, turned off, or not configured - this means the controller is affected by the vulnerability.
A user is affected if they have a MicroLogix 1100/1200/1400/1500, PLC-5, or SLC 500 controller with the Static status feature disabled (or not enabled), regardless of firmware version.
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 dataEnable the Static status feature on affected controllers to prevent unauthorized modification of status bits. This configuration change prevents the vulnerability from being exploitable.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,816.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-4690 — 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-2012-4690 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