CVE-2012-6660
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 · uneditedGE Healthcare Precision MPi has a password of (1) orion for the serviceapp user, (2) orion for the clinical operator user, and (3) PlatinumOne for the administrator user, which has unspecified impact and attack vectors. NOTE: it is not clear whether these passwords are default, hardcoded, or dependent on another system or product that requires a fixed value.
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 confidenceGE Healthcare Precision MPi medical imaging software contains three hardcoded/default passwords ('orion' for serviceapp and clinical operator users, 'PlatinumOne' for administrator) that allow unauthenticated remote attackers to gain full administrative access to the system.
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 dataall 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
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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 GE Healthcare Precision MPi installationLocate the GE Healthcare Precision MPi medical imaging software in your environment through software inventory, asset discovery, or by checking installed programs on relevant systemsAffected if The software is present and is the GE Healthcare Precision MPi product
-
Check for default service accountsExamine user account listings or authentication systems for accounts named 'serviceapp' and 'clinical operator' that may be used by the Precision MPi softwareAffected if Accounts named 'serviceapp' or 'clinical operator' exist in the system
-
Verify administrator account configurationCheck for an 'administrator' account associated with the Precision MPi software installationAffected if An administrator account for the software is present
-
Test default credentialsAttempt to authenticate or verify whether the accounts use the default passwords 'orion' (for serviceapp and clinical operator) and 'PlatinumOne' (for administrator)Affected if Any of these default passwords are still active or unchanged
-
Assess remote access exposureEvaluate network configuration and determine if the Precision MPi services are accessible remotely without authenticationAffected if Remote network access to the software is enabled and unauthenticated
If GE Healthcare Precision MPi is installed and any of the default accounts use their original hardcoded passwords with remote access enabled, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 dataImmediately change the hardcoded passwords to strong, unique credentials for all three accounts and contact GE Healthcare for official guidance on secure configuration and potential firmware updates.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,504.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-6660 — 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-2012-6660 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