CVE-2012-5572
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 · uneditedCRLF injection vulnerability in the cookie method (lib/Dancer/Cookie.pm) in Dancer before 1.3114 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers and conduct HTTP response splitting attacks via a cookie name, a different vulnerability than CVE-2012-5526.
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 confidenceCRLF injection vulnerability in Dancer's cookie method allows attackers to inject newline characters into cookie names, enabling HTTP header injection and response splitting attacks. This affects Dancer versions before 1.3114.
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<= 1.3113= 1.150= 1.3060= 1.3071= 1.3079_3= 1.3079_5= 1.3110= 1.3111= 1.3111_01= 1.3112CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/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 installed Dancer versionRun 'perl -MDancer -e 'print $Dancer::VERSION.'' or check your cpanfile/cpanfile.snapshot for Dancer version, or check the version in your installed Dancer moduleAffected if The version is 1.3113 or lower, or matches any of these: 1.150, 1.3060, 1.3071, 1.3079_3, 1.3079_5, 1.3110, 1.3111, 1.3111_01, 1.3112
-
Locate cookie handling codeSearch your application source code for calls to the 'cookie' method, such as 'cookie(name => ...)' or 'cookie($name, $value)'Affected if Your application uses the cookie method to set cookies with names that could be influenced by user input
-
Verify cookie name sanitizationReview the code paths that pass data to the cookie method. Determine whether cookie names are hardcoded, derived from trusted sources, or sourced from user-supplied input (query parameters, form inputs, headers)Affected if Cookie names are constructed from user-supplied input without validation that prevents newline characters (\n or \r)
-
Check for header injection defenseInspect whether your application or framework has any input validation or sanitization logic that strips or rejects newline characters from values before passing them to the cookie methodAffected if No sanitization exists for newline characters in cookie names before they are used
You are affected if your Dancer version is 1.3113 or lower (including the specific versions listed) AND your application passes user-controlled data as cookie names to the cookie method without filtering newline characters.
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 Dancer to version 1.3114 or later, which includes proper sanitization of cookie names to prevent CRLF injection.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-5572 — 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-2012-5572 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