CVE-2012-6128
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 · uneditedMultiple stack-based buffer overflows in http.c in OpenConnect before 4.08 allow remote VPN gateways to cause a denial of service (application crash) via a long (1) hostname, (2) path, or (3) cookie list in a response.
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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflows in OpenConnect's http.c file before version 4.08 allow a malicious VPN gateway to send responses containing excessively long hostname, path, or cookie list values that overflow stack buffers, causing the application to crash.
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<= 4.07= 1.00= 1.10= 1.20= 1.30= 1.40= 2.00= 2.01= 2.10= 2.11= 2.12= 2.20CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
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.
-
Verify OpenConnect is installedRun command: which openconnect or dpkg -l | grep openconnect or rpm -qa | grep openconnectAffected if OpenConnect is not found on the system, then not affected by this CVE
-
Determine installed OpenConnect versionRun command: openconnect --versionAffected if Version output shows a number that matches the affected list: 1.00, 1.10, 1.20, 1.30, 1.40, 2.00, 2.01, 2.10, 2.11, 2.12, 2.20, or any version <= 4.07
-
Confirm version is in vulnerable rangeCompare your installed version number to the list of affected versions (any version <= 4.07 or specifically listed versions)Affected if Installed version is 4.07 or lower, or matches any version in the affected list (1.00, 1.10, 1.20, 1.30, 1.40, 2.00, 2.01, 2.10, 2.11, 2.12, 2.20)
-
Verify http.c is part of the installationCheck for the OpenConnect binary or source installation: locate openconnect or find /usr -name '*openconnect*'Affected if OpenConnect is installed from source or package that includes the vulnerable http.c handling code
A user is affected if OpenConnect version 4.07 or lower (specifically versions 1.00 through 2.20 as listed) is installed and used to connect to VPN gateways, since the vulnerability triggers when processing server responses containing oversized hostname, path, or cookie values.
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 OpenConnect to version 4.08 or later to obtain the patched http.c code. Until then, limit connections to trusted VPN gateways only.
- 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-2012-6128 — 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-2012-6128 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