CVE-2012-5170
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 · uneditedOpen redirect vulnerability in Pebble before 2.6.4 allows remote attackers to redirect users to arbitrary web sites and conduct phishing attacks via unspecified vectors.
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 confidenceOpen redirect vulnerability in Pebble blogging software before version 2.6.4 allows remote attackers to redirect users to arbitrary external websites via unspecified vectors, enabling phishing attacks.
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<= 2.6.3= 1.0= 1.1= 1.2= 1.3= 1.4= 1.4.1= 1.4.1_01= 1.4.2= 1.4.2_01= 1.5= 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N
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.
-
Locate the Pebble installationCheck common deployment locations for Java web applications (e.g., WEB-INF/lib directory in servlet containers, or the directory where the Pebble JAR/WAR file is deployed)Affected if Pebble software is found running in the environment
-
Identify the Pebble versionExamine the Pebble JAR file name or WAR archive, or look for a version file within the deployment. The version is typically visible in the filename (e.g., pebble-2.6.3.jar) or in a MANIFEST.MF file inside the JARAffected if The installed version matches any of the affected versions listed (2.6.3 or earlier, or versions 1.0 through 1.5.1)
-
Verify the application is web-accessibleConfirm that the Pebble web application is exposed via HTTP/HTTPS and accessible to users or attackersAffected if The Pebble application is reachable over the network, enabling the open redirect vector to be exploited
-
Check for redirect-related parameters in application logsReview HTTP access logs for incoming requests containing redirect parameters (such as 'redirect=', 'url=', or 'return=') pointing to external domainsAffected if Requests to Pebble are being logged with external redirect targets, indicating the vulnerable redirect functionality is being exercised
A user is affected if Pebble blogging software version 2.6.3 or earlier (or versions 1.0-1.5.1) is installed and accessible as a web application, enabling attackers to craft malicious redirect URLs.
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 Pebble to version 2.6.4 or later to patch the open redirect vulnerability. Additionally, implement URL validation to reject redirects to external untrusted domains.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-5170 — 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-2012-5170 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