CVE-2013-0483
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 · uneditedThe login component in SOAP Gateway in IBM IMS Enterprise Suite 1.1, 2.1, and 2.2 uses cleartext credentials, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information by sniffing the network.
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 confidenceThe SOAP Gateway login component in IBM IMS Enterprise Suite versions 1.1, 2.1, and 2.2 transmits user credentials in cleartext (unencrypted) over the network, allowing attackers with packet capture capabilities to intercept and read authentication credentials via network sniffing.
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= 1.1= 2.1= 2.2CVSS 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
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 installed IBM IMS Enterprise Suite versionUse system inventory or package management tools to locate IBM IMS Enterprise Suite and determine its exact version numberAffected if Version is 1.1, 2.1, or 2.2
-
Confirm SOAP Gateway component is in useCheck if the SOAP Gateway login component is configured or active in the IBM IMS Enterprise Suite installationAffected if SOAP Gateway login component is enabled and processing authentication requests
-
Determine if TLS/SSL encryption is enabled for SOAP GatewayInspect the SOAP Gateway configuration files or security settings to verify whether TLS/SSL encryption is configured for the login componentAffected if TLS/SSL encryption is NOT enabled and credentials are transmitted in cleartext
-
Verify network traffic for cleartext credentialsUse network packet capture tools on network segments where SOAP Gateway traffic flows to observe if login credentials are transmitted unencryptedAffected if Packet capture reveals username and password sent in cleartext over the network
User is affected if running IBM IMS Enterprise Suite version 1.1, 2.1, or 2.2 with SOAP Gateway login component active and TLS/SSL encryption not enabled for that component.
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 dataEnable TLS/SSL encryption for the SOAP Gateway login component to ensure credentials are transmitted encrypted rather than in cleartext.
- 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-2013-0483 — 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-2013-0483 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