CVE-2013-2273
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 · uneditedbitcoind and Bitcoin-Qt before 0.4.9rc1, 0.5.x before 0.5.8rc1, 0.6.0 before 0.6.0.11rc1, 0.6.1 through 0.6.5 before 0.6.5rc1, and 0.7.x before 0.7.3rc1 make it easier for remote attackers to obtain potentially sensitive information about returned change by leveraging certain predictability in the outputs of a Bitcoin transaction.
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 confidenceBitcoin-Qt and bitcoind before specified versions expose information about transaction change outputs due to predictable output selection patterns. Attackers can analyze transaction structures to identify which outputs represent change, revealing sensitive wallet behavior such as spending patterns and potentially linking addresses to user identities.
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<= 0.4.8= 0.4= 0.5.0= 0.5.0.4= 0.5.1= 0.5.3.0= 0.5.7= 0.6.0.10= 0.6.3= 0.7.0= 0.7.1= 0.7.2all versions= 0.3.4= 0.3.5= 0.3.8= 0.3.10= 0.3.11= 0.3.12= 0.4.0= 0.4.1= 0.4.2= 0.4.3= 0.4.4<= 0.4.4= 0.5.7= 0.6.0.0= 0.6.0.10= 0.6.3= 0.6.4= 0.7.0= 0.7.1= 0.7.2CVSS 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
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/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 the installed Bitcoin software productRun 'bitcoind --version' or 'bitcoin-qt --version' from the command line, or check the application info/About dialog in the GUIAffected if The output shows any version of Bitcoin Core, Bitcoin-Qt, or bitcoind
-
Determine the exact version numberParse the version string from the version command output - look for versions in the format like 0.3.x, 0.4.x, 0.5.x, 0.6.x, or 0.7.xAffected if The version matches one listed in the affected versions for your product
-
Compare against affected version rangesCross-reference your detected version with the CVE-affected version list: Bitcoin-Qt <= 0.4.8, 0.5.0-0.5.7, 0.6.0-0.6.3, 0.7.0-0.7.2; Bitcoin Core 0.3.4-0.3.12, 0.4.0-0.4.4; Bitcoind <= 0.4.4, 0.5.7, 0.6.0-0.6.4, 0.7.0-0.7.2Affected if Your installed version falls within any of the affected ranges listed in the CVE
-
Confirm the software handles Bitcoin transactionsCheck if the node is actively used for transaction creation, wallet operations, or if it participates in the Bitcoin network as a full nodeAffected if The software is running as a wallet node that creates or broadcasts transactions
You are affected if you are running Bitcoin-Qt, bitcoind, or Bitcoin Core version 0.3.4 through 0.7.2 (specific to your product) and the software is used for transaction handling.
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 the patched versions (0.4.9rc1, 0.5.8rc1, 0.6.0.11rc1, 0.6.5rc1, or 0.7.3rc1 or later). For applications handling Bitcoin transactions, ensure change output selection uses cryptographic randomness to prevent predictability.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-2273 — 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-2013-2273 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