CVE-2013-2063
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 · uneditedInteger overflow in X.org libXtst 1.2.1 and earlier allows X servers to trigger allocation of insufficient memory and a buffer overflow via vectors related to the XRecordGetContext 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 confidenceInteger overflow vulnerability in X.org libXtst library (versions 1.2.1 and earlier) in the XRecordGetContext function allows X servers to allocate insufficient memory, leading to buffer overflow. The flaw occurs when the integer overflow results in a smaller-than-needed memory allocation, causing subsequent data to overflow the allocated buffer.
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<= 1.2.1= 1.0.2= 1.0.3= 1.0.99.1= 1.0.99.2= 1.1.0= 1.2.0CVSS 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 libXtst library is installedRun `ldconfig -p | grep -i xtst` on Linux or check installed packages with `dpkg -l | grep -i libxtst` (Debian) or `rpm -qa | grep -i libxtst` (RHEL)Affected if libXtst library is present on the system
-
Determine libXtst versionUse package manager to query version: `dpkg -s libxtst6` or `rpm -qi libXtst` or check the library file directly with `strings /usr/lib/libXtst.so.6 2>/dev/null | grep -i version`Affected if Installed version is 1.2.1 or earlier, or matches any of: 1.0.2, 1.0.3, 1.0.99.1, 1.0.99.2, 1.1.0, 1.2.0
-
Verify X Record extension is loadedRun `xdpyinfo -ext all 2>/dev/null | grep -i record` or use `xrandr -v` to check X server extensions, or inspect /var/log/Xorg.0.log for 'RECORD' extension loadingAffected if X Record extension (RECORD) is enabled in the X server
-
Check if applications use X Record extensionReview running applications configuration or source code for XRecordCreateContext or XRecordGetContext API calls, or monitor with `lsof | grep libXtst` to see linked applicationsAffected if Any application links against libXtst and uses the X Record extension functions
System is affected if libXtst version 1.2.1 or earlier is installed AND the X Record extension is enabled and actively used by any client application.
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 libXtst to a patched version that properly validates integer calculations before memory allocation. If immediate patching is not feasible, consider restricting X server access to trusted clients only to reduce attack surface.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-2063 — 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-2013-2063 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