CVE-2013-2178
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 apache-auth.conf, apache-nohome.conf, apache-noscript.conf, and apache-overflows.conf files in Fail2ban before 0.8.10 do not properly validate log messages, which allows remote attackers to block arbitrary IP addresses via certain messages in a request.
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 confidenceFail2ban before 0.8.10 contains improper input validation in four Apache-related filter configuration files (apache-auth.conf, apache-nohome.conf, apache-noscript.conf, apache-overflows.conf). The vulnerability allows remote attackers to inject specially crafted log messages that cause Fail2ban to ban arbitrary IP addresses, potentially enabling denial of service against legitimate users or bypassing the intrusion prevention system.
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<= 0.8.9= 0.1.0= 0.1.1= 0.1.2= 0.3.0= 0.3.1= 0.4.0= 0.4.1= 0.5.0= 0.5.1= 0.5.2= 0.5.3CVSS 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
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/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 Fail2ban installed versionRun 'fail2ban-client --version' or 'rpm -q fail2ban' or 'dpkg -l fail2ban' depending on your systemAffected if The version is 0.8.9 or earlier, or matches one of these: 0.1.0, 0.1.1, 0.1.2, 0.3.0, 0.3.1, 0.4.0, 0.4.1, 0.5.0, 0.5.1, 0.5.2, 0.5.3
-
Locate Apache filter configuration filesFind the filter directory, typically in /etc/fail2ban/filter.d/ or /usr/share/fail2ban/filter.d/, and check for apache-auth.conf, apache-nohome.conf, apache-noscript.conf, and apache-overflows.confAffected if Any of these four filter files exist on the system
-
Check if vulnerable filters are enabledInspect /etc/fail2ban/jail.conf or jail.local for sections named [apache-auth], [apache-nohome], [apache-noscript], or [apache-overflows] with enabled = trueAffected if One or more of these Apache filters are enabled (enabled = true)
-
Verify log parsing behaviorReview the regex/failregex patterns in the affected filter files for any pattern that directly uses <HOST> without proper anchoring or validationAffected if The filter uses <HOST> in patterns that could accept arbitrary log content as a host identifier
You are affected if Fail2ban version is 0.8.9 or earlier and any of the apache-auth, apache-nohome, apache-noscript, or apache-overflows filters are enabled
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 Fail2ban to version 0.8.10 or later, which contains proper validation fixes for the affected Apache filter configurations.
- Consultation3.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-2178 — 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-2013-2178 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