CVE-2013-0517
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 · uneditedA Command Execution Vulnerability exists in IBM Sterling External Authentication Server 2.2.0, 2.3.01, 2.4.0, and 2.4.1 via an unspecified OS command, which could let a local malicious user execute arbitrary code.
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 confidenceIBM Sterling External Authentication Server versions 2.2.0, 2.3.01, 2.4.0, and 2.4.1 contain a local command execution vulnerability allowing an authenticated local user to execute arbitrary OS commands, likely through improper input validation or insecure use of system calls in the application.
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= 2.2.0= 2.3.01= 2.4.0= 2.4.1CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 IBM Sterling External Authentication Server is installedCheck for the product in your system inventory or look for its installation directory (typically under the IBM/Sterling or similar product root path). On Windows, check Program Files; on Unix/Linux, check /opt or /usr/local.Affected if The product is present on the system
-
Determine the installed versionLocate the version information file or use the product's built-in version command. Common locations include a version.txt file in the installation root, or the product's About/Version dialog if a GUI is available.Affected if The installed version is 2.2.0, 2.3.01, 2.4.0, or 2.4.1 specifically
-
Verify local user authentication is enabledCheck the product's authentication configuration settings. Look for options enabling local operating system user authentication or local password authentication in the security or authentication configuration files.Affected if Local user authentication or local OS authentication is enabled and configured
-
Confirm user accounts exist on the systemReview the list of local operating system users who have access to the host where SEAS is installed. Check both the OS user list and any application-specific user mappings configured in SEAS.Affected if There are authenticated local users provisioned in the system who can log in to SEAS
You are affected if IBM Sterling External Authentication Server is installed at version 2.2.0, 2.3.01, 2.4.0, or 2.4.1 and local user authentication is enabled with at least one local user account configured.
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 patches for this vulnerability; if unavailable, minimize local user access and enforce least-privilege principles on the host system.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-0517 — 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-2013-0517 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