CVE-2013-0187
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 · uneditedForeman before 1.1 allows remote authenticated users to gain privileges via a (1) XMLHttpRequest or (2) AJAX request.
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 confidenceForeman before version 1.1 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability where authenticated remote users can exploit XMLHttpRequest or AJAX requests to gain elevated privileges beyond what their account should permit. This is a web application authorization flaw allowing authenticated users to perform actions outside their intended permission scope.
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<= 1.0CVSS 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
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/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.
-
Check Foreman web interface versionLog into the Foreman web UI and locate the version number typically displayed in the footer or under Administer > About. Alternatively, access the /about endpoint if available.Affected if The displayed version is 1.0 or lower (e.g., 1.0, 0.x releases)
-
Check installed package versionIf Foreman was installed via system packages, run: rpm -q foreman (RHEL/CentOS) or dpkg -l | grep foreman (Debian/Ubuntu)Affected if The package version listed is 1.0.x or lower
-
Verify Foreman API version endpointQuery the API endpoint GET /api/status or GET /api/v2/users if accessible, and inspect the response for version metadata.Affected if The API returns a version field showing 1.0 or lower
-
Confirm authenticated user access existsCheck that the Foreman instance has user authentication enabled and has at least one non-admin user account configured.Affected if User authentication is active and multiple user roles exist (this is required for the privilege escalation to be exploitable)
A Foreman installation is affected if it is version 1.0 or lower and has user authentication enabled, allowing authenticated users to potentially exploit the XMLHttpRequest/AJAX authorization flaw.
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 Foreman to version 1.1 or later to obtain the patched code that properly validates authorization on XMLHttpRequest/AJAX requests.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-0187 — 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-2013-0187 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