CVE-2013-0460
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 · uneditedCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the portlet subsystem in the administrative console in IBM WebSphere Application Server (WAS) 6.1 before 6.1.0.47 and 7.0 before 7.0.0.27 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests that insert cross-site scripting (XSS) sequences.
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 confidenceCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the portlet subsystem of the IBM WebSphere Application Server administrative console allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users and inject cross-site scripting (XSS) sequences through crafted requests.
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= 6.1.0.0= 6.1.0.1= 6.1.0.2= 6.1.0.3= 6.1.0.5= 6.1.0.7= 6.1.0.9= 6.1.0.11= 6.1.0.12= 6.1.0.13= 6.1.0.14= 6.1.0.15CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/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.
-
Identify WebSphere Application Server versionRun the versionInfo command from the WAS bin directory (versionInfo.sh on Linux/Unix, versionInfo.bat on Windows) or check the install.properties file in the properties directoryAffected if The installed version matches any of: 6.1.0.0, 6.1.0.1, 6.1.0.2, 6.1.0.3, 6.1.0.5, 6.1.0.7, 6.1.0.9, 6.1.0.11, 6.1.0.12, 6.1.0.13, 6.1.0.14, or 6.1.0.15
-
Verify administrative console is enabledCheck the was.installroot/config/cells/cellname/nodes/nodename/serverindex.xml file or inspect the webcontainer or admin application settings via the wsadmin toolAffected if The admin console application (adminconsole) is installed and running on the target environment
-
Confirm portlet subsystem is in useInspect the portlet-related configuration files in the WAS config directory (look for portlet.xml files or portlet deployment descriptors in installedApplications) or check if portlet applications are deployed via the admin consoleAffected if Any portlet-based applications are deployed or the portlet container subsystem is active within the WAS instance
You are affected if WebSphere Application Server version 6.1.0.0 through 6.1.0.15 is installed AND the administrative console with portlet subsystem is enabled and accessible.
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 dataApply IBM WebSphere Application Server fixes 6.1.0.47 (for WAS 6.1) or 7.0.0.27 (for WAS 7.0) or later to address the CSRF vulnerability in the portlet subsystem.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-0460 — 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-2013-0460 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