CVE-2012-6302
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 · uneditedSoapbox through 0.3.1: Sandbox bypass - runs a second instance of Soapbox within a sandboxed Soapbox.
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 confidenceSoapbox through version 0.3.1 contains a sandbox bypass vulnerability that allows an attacker to run a second instance of Soapbox outside the confines of an existing sandbox. This escape occurs because the application does not properly enforce sandbox restrictions when spawning child processes or new instances of itself.
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<= 0.3.1CVSS 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
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 Soapbox installationLocate the Soapbox application on the system using system package managers, program directories, or file system searches for 'soapbox' executable or application files.Affected if Soapbox is found on the system
-
Determine installed versionUse the application's version display function, check the binary/application metadata, or inspect version information in the application directory to identify the exact version number.Affected if Version is 0.3.1 or any version lower than 0.3.1
-
Verify sandbox feature is in useCheck if the sandbox functionality is enabled or being utilized in the Soapbox configuration or runtime environment.Affected if Sandbox mode is active or configured for use
-
Inspect for child process spawningMonitor system process activity to detect if Soapbox is spawning additional child processes or new instances of itself.Affected if Multiple Soapbox processes or child processes are observed running outside the expected sandbox boundaries
The environment is affected if Soapbox version 0.3.1 or earlier is installed AND the sandbox feature is actively being used, allowing potential bypass through child process or new instance spawning.
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 Soapbox to a version beyond 0.3.1 that includes proper sandboxing enforcement for child processes, or implement additional controls to prevent untrusted code from spawning additional Soapbox instances.
- 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-2012-6302 — 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-2012-6302 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