CVE-2013-0447
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 · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in the JavaFX component in Oracle Java SE JavaFX 2.2.4 and earlier allows remote attackers to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability via unknown vectors, a different vulnerability than other CVEs listed in the February 2013 CPU.
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 confidenceA critical severity (CVSS 10) unspecified vulnerability in JavaFX 2.2.4 and earlier allows remote attackers to fully impact confidentiality, integrity, and availability via unknown vectors. This vulnerability is distinct from other CVEs in the February 2013 Oracle Critical Patch Update but specific exploitation details are not provided.
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<= 2.2.4= 2.0= 2.0.2= 2.0.3= 2.1= 2.2= 2.2.3CVSS 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 if JavaFX is installedLocate JavaFX runtime or SDK on the system. Common indicators include the jfxrt.jar file in the JDK/JRE lib directory, or a JavaFX SDK installation folder. Check both standalone installations and bundled JavaFX distributions.Affected if JavaFX runtime or SDK is present on the system
-
Determine the installed JavaFX versionQuery the version of the installed JavaFX component. This can be done by examining the JavaFX jar manifest, version properties, or using command-line tools if available (such as 'java -version' output if JavaFX version is reported, or inspecting the jar file metadata).Affected if The installed version cannot be determined or is one of the known affected versions
-
Compare version against affected rangeMatch the discovered version number against the affected versions: 2.0, 2.0.2, 2.0.3, 2.1, 2.2, 2.2.3, or any version up to and including 2.2.4.Affected if The installed version is 2.0, 2.0.2, 2.0.3, 2.1, 2.2, 2.2.3, or any version <= 2.2.4
If JavaFX is installed and its version falls within 2.0 through 2.2.4 (inclusive), 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 dataUpdate JavaFX to a patched version (apply February 2013 CPU or later) to remediate this critical vulnerability.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-0447 — 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-2013-0447 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