CVE-2013-0694
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 Emerson Process Management ROC800 RTU with software 3.50 and earlier, DL8000 RTU with software 2.30 and earlier, and ROC800L RTU with software 1.20 and earlier have hardcoded credentials in a ROM, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain shell access to the underlying OS by leveraging knowledge of the ROM contents from a product installation elsewhere.
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 confidenceThis is a hardcoded credentials vulnerability in Emerson Process Management ROC800, DL8000, and ROC800L RTU devices. The devices contain hardcoded credentials embedded in ROM, allowing remote attackers who obtain the ROM contents to gain shell access to the underlying operating system.
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<= 2.30<= 1.20<= 3.50all versionsall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/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 the device modelLocate the device nameplate or check system documentation to confirm the exact model (ROC800, DL8000, or ROC800L). In the device interface, check the system information or product label.Affected if The device is an Emerson ROC800, DL8000, or ROC800L Remote Terminal Unit
-
Determine the firmware versionAccess the device management interface or check system information to retrieve the installed firmware version. Compare against the vulnerable version ranges: ROC800 <=3.50, DL8000 <=2.30, ROC800L <=1.20.Affected if The firmware version is at or below 3.50 for ROC800, 2.30 for DL8000, or 1.20 for ROC800L
-
Verify network accessibility of the deviceCheck network configuration and firewall rules to determine if the device management ports are exposed to untrusted networks. Scan for open management interfaces.Affected if The device management interface is accessible from untrusted networks, allowing potential ROM extraction
-
Check for firmware extraction vectorsReview network services, protocols, and configuration to identify if firmware dumps or ROM contents can be retrieved remotely (e.g., via FTP, TFTP, debug ports, or unsecured backup features).Affected if Remote firmware extraction is possible due to exposed services or default access methods
A user is affected if they operate a ROC800 (firmware <=3.50), DL8000 (<=2.30), or ROC800L (<=1.20) device with network accessibility that could allow an attacker to extract ROM contents containing the hardcoded credentials.
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 dataReplace hardcoded credentials with unique, strong credentials; update firmware to versions beyond the vulnerable releases (ROC800 >3.50, DL8000 >2.30, ROC800L >1.20); implement network segmentation to limit exposure of affected devices.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $14,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-0694 — 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-2013-0694 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