CVE-2013-1996
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 · uneditedX.org libFS 1.0.4 and earlier allows X servers to trigger allocation of insufficient memory and a buffer overflow via vectors related to an unexpected sign extension in the FSOpenServer function.
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 confidenceA buffer overflow vulnerability in X.org libFS 1.0.4 and earlier allows a malicious X server to trigger insufficient memory allocation via an unexpected sign extension in the FSOpenServer function. This could potentially allow execution of arbitrary code or denial of service.
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<= 1.0.4= 1.0.1= 1.0.2= 1.0.3CVSS 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.
-
Check if libFS library is presentSearch for libFS shared library files (e.g., libFS.so, libFS.so.6) in common system library directories (/usr/lib, /usr/lib64) or use package management commands (e.g., 'dpkg -l', 'rpm -qa') to list installed packages containing 'libFS'.Affected if libFS is installed on the system.
-
Determine the installed version of libFSUse version query methods such as 'pkg-config --modversion libfs', 'rpm -qi libFS', or inspect the library file's metadata. If version information is not directly accessible, treat the library as potentially vulnerable if it originates from an older installation.Affected if The installed version is 1.0.4 or earlier (specifically 1.0.1, 1.0.2, 1.0.3, or an unspecified version <=1.0.4).
-
Check if FSOpenServer function is invoked or X server connections are acceptedReview running processes or configurations that rely on libFS for X server connections, such as X display managers (xdm, gdm, kdm) or applications connecting to remote X servers. Examine configuration files (e.g., /etc/X11/xdm/xdm-config) for settings that permit remote X connections, and verify firewall or access controls.Affected if The system uses libFS to connect to X servers, especially if connections from untrusted or unauthorized X servers are possible.
A system is affected if it has libFS version 1.0.4 or earlier installed and actively uses it to connect to X servers, as the vulnerability in FSOpenServer could be triggered by a malicious X server.
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 dataUpdate libFS to a version newer than 1.0.4, or apply vendor patches. If immediate patching is not feasible, restrict X server connections to trusted sources only.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-1996 — 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-2013-1996 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