CVE-2012-5218
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 · uneditedHP ElitePad 900 PCs with BIOS F.0x before F.01 Update 1.0.0.8 do not enable the Secure Boot feature, which allows local users to bypass intended BIOS restrictions and boot unintended operating systems 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 · high confidenceHP ElitePad 900 tablets ship with BIOS F.0x versions that do not have Secure Boot enabled by default. This allows a local attacker with physical access to bypass BIOS-level security restrictions and boot unauthorized operating systems, potentially compromising the device's integrity and enabling further 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= 900CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/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.
-
Confirm device model is HP ElitePad 900Check the device model number in System Information or on the device labelAffected if The device is not an HP ElitePad 900 - this CVE only affects that specific model
-
Check the installed BIOS versionAccess the BIOS setup (press Esc or F10 at startup) and navigate to the BIOS version information, or use the HP Support Assistant tool to view BIOS versionAffected if The BIOS version starts with 'F.' (F.0x range) - versions F.01 through F.09 are affected
-
Verify Secure Boot status in BIOS configurationEnter BIOS setup (press Esc or F10 at startup), navigate to Security or Boot options, and locate the Secure Boot settingAffected if Secure Boot is listed as 'Disabled' or 'Not Enabled' - the vulnerability only applies when Secure Boot is not active
The environment is affected if you have an HP ElitePad 900 with BIOS version F.0x (F.01 through F.09) where Secure Boot remains disabled in the BIOS configuration.
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 the BIOS to version F.01 Update 1.0.0.8 or later, which enables Secure Boot by default, and verify the Secure Boot setting is active in the BIOS configuration.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-5218 — 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-2012-5218 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