dbcve.org
iOSOperating system · Cisco

CVE-2013-0149

MEDIUM · 5.8 CVSS v2.0 Published 2013-08-05
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
67/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
The OSPF implementation in Cisco IOS 12.0 through 12.4 and 15.0 through 15.3, IOS-XE 2.x through 3.9.xS, ASA and PIX 7.x through 9.1, FWSM, NX-OS, and StarOS before 14.0.50488 does not properly validate Link State Advertisement (LSA) type 1 packets before performing operations on the LSA database, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (routing disruption) or obtain sensitive packet information via a (1) unicast or (2) multicast packet, aka Bug IDs CSCug34485, CSCug34469, CSCug39762, CSCug63304, and CSCug39795.

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 confidence

This is a validation flaw in Cisco's OSPF implementation where LSA type 1 packets are not checked before database operations. Remote attackers can send crafted unicast or multicast OSPF packets to cause routing disruption (DoS) or extract sensitive routing topology information from the LSA database.

MitigationApply Cisco security patches for affected IOS/IOS-XE/ASA/NX-OS/StarOS versions. Implement OSPF authentication (MD5 or HMAC-SHA) on all OSPF neighbors and use ACLs to restrict OSPF packet sources to trusted networks.

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
iOSOperating system
Affected:= 12.0= 12.0\(1\)= 12.0\(1\)s= 12.0\(1\)st= 12.0\(1\)w= 12.0\(1\)xa3= 12.0\(1\)xb= 12.0\(1\)xe= 12.0\(2\)= 12.0\(2\)xc= 12.0\(2\)xd= 12.0\(2\)xe
Ios XeOperating system
Affected:= 2.1.0= 2.1.1= 2.1.2= 2.2.1= 2.2.2= 2.2.3= 2.3.0= 2.3.1= 2.3.1t= 2.3.2= 2.4.0= 2.4.1
Asa 5500Hardware / appliance
Affected:= 7.0= 7.1= 7.2= 8.0= 8.1= 8.2= 9.0= 9.1
Pix Firewall SoftwareOperating system
Affected:= 7.0= 7.1= 7.2= 8.0\(2\)= 9.0= 9.1
FwsmHardware / appliance
Affected:all versions
Nx OsOperating system
Affected:all versions
StarosOperating system
Affected:= 14.0

CVSS 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
M
Authentication
None
Confidentiality
Partial
Integrity
None
Availability
Partial

AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm OSPF is enabled on the device
    Run 'show ip ospf' or 'show ospf' from the CLI to see if OSPF process is running and configured
    Affected if OSPF process is active and the device participates in OSPF routing (this makes the device vulnerable to the LSA type 1 validation flaw)
  2. Identify the installed software version
    Run 'show version' and locate the version string (for iOS/IOS-XE) or 'show version' for ASA/NX-OS/StarOS. Compare the full version number against the listed affected versions for your product line
    Affected if The device runs an unpatched version matching one of the listed affected versions (12.0, 12.0(1), 2.1.x through 2.4.x for IOS-XE, 7.x-9.x for ASA, 7.x-9.1 for PIX, all versions of FWSM and NX-OS, or StarOS 14.0)
  3. Verify OSPF interface configuration
    Run 'show ip ospf interface' to list all interfaces participating in OSPF and their OSPF area assignments
    Affected if Any interface is configured with OSPF and attached to an area (type 1 LSAs are generated from these interfaces)
  4. Check OSPF authentication status
    Run 'show ip ospf interface' and look for 'Authentication' field, or examine OSPF interface configuration with 'show running-config | include ospf' to see if MD5 or HMAC-SHA authentication is configured
    Affected if OSPF neighbors are configured without authentication (the vulnerability can be exploited by unauthenticated OSPF packets)

The device is affected if OSPF is enabled and the software version matches any of the unpatched versions listed in the affected products, especially if OSPF authentication is not configured on OSPF neighbors.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply Cisco security patches for affected IOS/IOS-XE/ASA/NX-OS/StarOS versions. Implement OSPF authentication (MD5 or HMAC-SHA) on all OSPF neighbors and use ACLs to restrict OSPF packet sources to trusted networks.

Fix this in iOS Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-0149 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2013-0149 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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