CVE-2012-4943
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 · uneditedMultiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in Agile FleetCommander and FleetCommander Kiosk before 4.08 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests that modify (1) passwords, (2) accounts, or (3) permissions.
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 confidenceMultiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities exist in Agile FleetCommander and FleetCommander Kiosk versions prior to 4.08. The flaws allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users by tricking them into submitting malicious requests that modify passwords, create or modify accounts, or alter permissions.
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<= 4.0<= 4.0CVSS 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/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 FleetCommander versionAccess the web interface admin panel or check application metadata for the exact version number of Agilefleet Fleetcommander or Fleetcommander KioskAffected if version is 4.0 or lower (4.0, 3.x, or earlier)
-
Confirm product typeDetermine whether the installation is FleetCommander (full application) or FleetCommander Kiosk (kiosk module)Affected if either product variant is installed and version is 4.0 or lower
-
Check web interface accessibilityVerify the FleetCommander web interface is accessible over HTTP/HTTPSAffected if the web interface is exposed and reachable
-
Inspect password change form for anti-CSRF protectionAccess the password change form in the web interface and view the page source to check for anti-CSRF tokens (hidden form fields or tokens in POST requests)Affected if no anti-CSRF token is present in the password change form
-
Inspect account management forms for anti-CSRF protectionAccess account creation and modification forms, view page source, and verify whether anti-CSRF tokens are included in these state-changing formsAffected if no anti-CSRF tokens are present in account management forms
You are affected if FleetCommander or FleetCommander Kiosk version 4.0 or lower is running and the web interface lacks anti-CSRF tokens on password change, account creation, and permission modification forms.
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 dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens on all state-changing forms (password change, account management, and permissions) and validate the Origin/Referer headers on POST requests to prevent cross-site request forgery attacks.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-4943 — 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-2012-4943 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