CVE-2013-2104
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 · uneditedpython-keystoneclient before 0.2.4, as used in OpenStack Keystone (Folsom), does not properly check expiry for PKI tokens, which allows remote authenticated users to (1) retain use of a token after it has expired, or (2) use a revoked token once it expires.
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 confidencepython-keystoneclient before 0.2.4 fails to validate the expiration timestamp on PKI tokens. The client accepts tokens that have passed their expiry time or continue to use tokens that have been revoked after expiration, allowing authenticated users to bypass authentication controls.
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<= 0.2.3= 0.2.2CVSS 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
- Low
- Authentication
- Single
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/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 installed python-keystoneclient versionRun 'pip show python-keystoneclient' or use 'pip freeze' to retrieve the installed version number of the packageAffected if The installed version is 0.2.3 or any version prior to 0.2.4 (versions 0.2.2 through 0.2.3 and earlier are vulnerable)
-
Verify PKI token authentication is enabledExamine the OpenStack Keystone configuration files or client environment settings to determine if PKI tokens are configured as the token providerAffected if PKI tokens are the configured token format in the Keystone deployment
-
Inspect token validation implementationReview the python-keystoneclient source code or behavior when handling expired tokens, specifically looking for timestamp validation on PKI tokensAffected if The client code lacks or bypasses expiration timestamp checks for PKI tokens
The environment is affected if python-keystoneclient version 0.2.3 or earlier is installed AND PKI tokens are in use, because the client will accept tokens that have exceeded their expiration time.
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 python-keystoneclient to version 0.2.4 or later, which implements proper PKI token expiration validation.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $3,904.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-2104 — 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-2013-2104 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