CVE-2013-2133
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 EJB invocation handler implementation in Red Hat JBossWS, as used in JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) before 6.2.0, does not properly enforce the method level restrictions for JAX-WS Service endpoints, which allows remote authenticated users to access otherwise restricted JAX-WS handlers by leveraging permissions to the EJB class.
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 confidenceThe EJB invocation handler in Red Hat JBossWS fails to enforce method-level access restrictions for JAX-WS Service endpoints. Authenticated users with permissions to an EJB class can invoke restricted JAX-WS handlers that should be protected, due to improper access control enforcement in the EJB invocation handler implementation.
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<= 6.1.0= 4.2.0= 4.3.0= 5.0.0= 5.0.1= 5.1.0= 5.1.1= 5.1.2= 5.2.0= 5.2.1= 5.2.2= 6.0.0= 5= 6.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Authentication
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:N
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 JBoss Enterprise Application Platform versionLocate the JBoss/EAP installation and check the version file (typically in the root JBoss directory, often named 'version.txt' or accessible via the 'run.jar' manifest). Common locations include /opt/jboss-eap or similar installation paths.Affected if The installed version matches one of the affected versions: 4.2.0, 4.3.0, 5.0.0, 5.0.1, 5.1.0, 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.0, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 6.0.0, or any version 6.1.0 or earlier.
-
Determine if JAX-WS endpoints are deployedSearch the deployment directory (typically 'deploy/' or ' deployments/') for JAX-WS descriptor files: web.xml containing <soap-address> or <service> elements, or wsdl files with SOAP binding. Also look for JAR files containing JAX-WS annotated classes (javax.jws.*).Affected if JAX-WS service endpoints are deployed on the JBoss server.
-
Verify EJB-to-JAX-WS integration existsExamine deployed EJBs to identify those that expose JAX-WS web service interfaces. Look for EJB JARs with remote business interfaces that use javax.jws.WebService or javax.jws.WebMethod annotations, or check for EJB deployment descriptors (ejb-jar.xml) referencing service-endpoint-interface elements.Affected if EJBs are configured to expose web service endpoints (EJB3 webservices or JAX-WS service endpoints).
-
Inspect method-level security constraintsReview the deployment descriptors and annotations for JAX-WS endpoints to identify method-level access restrictions. Check for security-role-ref, security-role elements in ejb-jar.xml, or @RolesAllowed, @PermitAll, @DenyAll annotations on JAX-WS methods within EJB implementations.Affected if Method-level security constraints are defined but may not be properly enforced due to the vulnerability.
-
Check for authenticated user access to EJB servicesReview the application's authentication configuration to determine if users authenticate to access the EJB/JAX-WS services. Examine login-config.xml, security-domain settings, or database-backed login modules.Affected if The application accepts authenticated users to invoke EJB-based JAX-WS services.
If the environment runs a JBoss/EAP version within the affected list, has deployed JAX-WS endpoints via EJBs, and relies on method-level access controls, the improper access control enforcement in the EJB invocation handler may allow authenticated users to bypass intended method restrictions.
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 JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) 6.2.0 or later, which contains the fixed EJB invocation handler that properly enforces method-level restrictions for JAX-WS endpoints.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-2133 — 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-2013-2133 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