Axis2Application · Apache
CVE-2012-5351
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 · uneditedApache Axis2 allows remote attackers to forge messages and bypass authentication via a SAML assertion that lacks a Signature element, aka a "Signature exclusion attack," a different vulnerability than CVE-2012-4418.
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 confidenceApache Axis2 fails to properly validate SAML assertion signatures, allowing remote attackers to bypass authentication by submitting unsigned SAML assertions. The vulnerability stems from the framework accepting SAML assertions without requiring cryptographic signature verification, enabling attackers to forge authentication tokens.
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
Axis2Application
all 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
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/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.
-
Identify Axis2 deploymentLocate Axis2 installation directories or web application archives (WAR files). Check application servers (Tomcat, JBoss, etc.) for deployed Axis2 web applications.Affected if Apache Axis2 is deployed in the environment
-
Determine if SAML authentication is in useReview Axis2 services.xml configuration files and look for SAML-based authentication handlers or modules. Check if any web services rely on SAML tokens for authentication.Affected if SAML-based authentication is configured in Axis2 services or modules
-
Inspect SAML token consumer configurationLocate the SAML token consumer or validation configuration files within the Axis2 deployment. These are typically found in axis2.xml, module configuration, or custom SAML handler configurations.Affected if SAML token consumer configuration exists and signature validation is not set to mandatory
-
Check for disabled signature verificationSearch configuration files for settings such as 'validateSignature=false', 'requireSignature=false', or similar flags that disable SAML assertion signature validation.Affected if Configuration explicitly disables signature validation or does not require signatures on SAML assertions
If Apache Axis2 is deployed with SAML authentication and signature validation is not enforced as mandatory, the environment is vulnerable to CVE-2012-5351.
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 mandatory signature validation for all SAML assertions in Axis2, rejecting any unsigned assertions. Additionally, review and harden the SAML token processing logic to ensure signatures are always required and properly verified.
Fix this in Axis2
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-5351 — 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-2012-5351 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