CVE-2012-5522
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 · uneditedMantisBT before 1.2.12 does not use an expected default value during decisions about whether a user may modify the status of a bug, which allows remote authenticated users to bypass intended access restrictions and make status changes by leveraging a blank value for a per-status setting.
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 confidenceMantisBT before 1.2.12 has an access control bypass where the application fails to use a secure default value when a per-status setting is blank or unconfigured. This allows authenticated users to modify bug statuses they should not have permission to change by leveraging the missing default value in the access control decision logic.
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<= 1.2.11= 0.18.0= 0.19.0= 0.19.1= 0.19.2= 0.19.3= 0.19.4= 0.19.5= 1.0.0= 1.0.1= 1.0.2= 1.0.3CVSS 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
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/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.
-
Determine MantisBT versionCheck the version.php file in the MantisBT root directory, or look for the version string in the admin/about.php pageAffected if Version is 1.2.11 or earlier, or matches any of these: 0.18.0, 0.19.0-0.19.5, 1.0.0-1.0.3
-
Locate per-status access control configurationExamine the MantisBT configuration database or config_inc.php file for settings related to status update permissions, typically fields like $g_status_levels or similar per-status permission arraysAffected if The configuration file or database contains per-status permission settings that are blank, null, or uninitialized for some statuses
-
Query database for unconfigured status permissionsConnect to the MantisBT database and query the configuration table (often mantis_config_table) for entries where status permission values are empty or missing, particularly for private statuses or status transitionsAffected if Any status entries in the configuration table have NULL, empty string, or no defined value for access control settings
-
Verify authenticated user permissions on bug statusesAs a test authenticated user with limited privileges, attempt to modify a bug status that should be restricted based on your role, or review the access_levels table for any status_action that has no explicit allow/deny ruleAffected if Users can change bug statuses that they should not have permission to modify, indicating the insecure default is being applied
A user is affected if their MantisBT version is 1.2.11 or earlier (or matches the specific listed versions) AND any per-status access control settings are left blank, unset, or default to an insecure permissive value.
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 to MantisBT 1.2.12 or later, or ensure all per-status access control settings are explicitly configured with values rather than left blank.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-5522 — 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-2012-5522 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