Ubuntu LinuxOperating system · Canonical
CVE-2013-1865
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 · uneditedOpenStack Keystone Folsom (2012.2) does not properly perform revocation checks for Keystone PKI tokens when done through a server, which allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions via a revoked PKI token.
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 confidenceOpenStack Keystone Folsom (2012.2) fails to properly perform revocation checks when validating PKI tokens through a Keystone server, allowing attackers to bypass access controls by using tokens that should have been revoked.
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
Ubuntu LinuxOperating system
= 12.10= 2012.2CVSS 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
- 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 Keystone versionRun `keystone-manage --version` or check the package version via `dpkg -l | grep keystone` on Ubuntu. Compare the output to the affected version Folsom 2012.2.Affected if The installed Keystone version is 2012.2 (Folsom) or the package version matches Ubuntu 12.10's default keystone package.
-
Confirm PKI token usageReview the Keystone configuration file (typically /etc/keystone/keystone.conf) and look for `[token]` section with `provider = keystone.token.providers.pki.Provider` or similar PKI-related provider settings.Affected if PKI token provider is configured and in use for token issuance.
-
Verify revocation checking configurationInspect the Keystone configuration file for revocation settings. Look for `[revocation] section` and check if `cache_time` is set appropriately. Also check if revocation events are being processed.Affected if Revocation checking is not explicitly configured, is disabled (e.g., `enabled = false`), or the revocation cache is not being refreshed.
-
Check revocation list endpoint statusQuery the Keystone revocation endpoint (e.g., `GET /v2.0/tokens/revoked`) or inspect the revocation list file referenced in the configuration to confirm it is being served and updated.Affected if The revocation endpoint is not accessible, returns empty/invalid data, or is not being checked during token validation.
A user is affected if running OpenStack Keystone Folsom 2012.2 (or Ubuntu 12.10) with PKI tokens and revocation checking is either not configured, disabled, or not functioning properly.
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 dataUpgrade to a patched version of OpenStack or ensure PKI token revocation checking is properly configured and enabled in the Keystone deployment.
Fix this in Ubuntu Linux
Scoped from the published advisory
- 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-2013-1865 — 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-2013-1865 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