CVE-2012-5049
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 · uneditedAPIFTP Server in Optimalog Optima PLC 1.5.2 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (infinite loop) via a malformed packet.
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 APIFTP Server in Optimalog Optima PLC versions 1.5.2 and earlier contains a vulnerability where malformed packets trigger an infinite loop, causing a denial of service. Remote attackers can crash the service without authentication by sending specially crafted packets.
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<= 1.5.2= 1.4.9= 1.4.10= 1.5.0= 1.5.1CVSS 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.
-
Identify if Optimalog Optima PLC is installedLocate the Optima PLC software installation directory or check program listings for Optimalog Optima PLCAffected if The software is present on the system
-
Determine the installed versionCheck the software version through its main executable, about dialog, or version information file in the installation directoryAffected if The version is 1.5.2 or earlier, specifically 1.4.9, 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 1.5.1, or 1.5.2
-
Verify the APIFTP service is runningCheck running services or processes for APIFTP Server or related FTP service components used by the PLCAffected if The APIFTP service is active and listening on a network port
-
Assess network exposureDetermine if the PLC system is directly accessible from untrusted networks or if APIFTP port is exposed externallyAffected if The APIFTP service is reachable from untrusted network segments
You are affected if Optimalog Optima PLC version 1.5.2 or earlier is installed with the APIFTP service running and exposed to network access where malicious packets could be received.
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 dataUpdate Optimalog Optima PLC to a version later than 1.5.2. If no vendor update is available, implement network segmentation to restrict untrusted access to the PLC and disable the APIFTP service if not required.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 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 $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-5049 — 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-2012-5049 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