CVE-2013-2293
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 CTransaction::FetchInputs method in bitcoind and Bitcoin-Qt before 0.8.0rc1 copies transactions from disk to memory without incrementally checking for spent prevouts, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (disk I/O consumption) via a Bitcoin transaction with many inputs corresponding to many different parts of the stored block chain.
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 confidenceIn bitcoind and Bitcoin-Qt before 0.8.0rc1, the CTransaction::FetchInputs method loads transactions from disk to memory without performing incremental checks for spent previous outputs. An attacker can craft a transaction with many inputs referencing disparate parts of the blockchain, forcing excessive disk I/O and causing denial of service.
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= 0.4.8= 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= 0.7.1all versions<= 0.7.2= 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= 0.5.7= 0.6.0.0= 0.6.0.10= 0.6.3= 0.6.4= 0.7.0= 0.7.1CVSS 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.
-
Identify the installed Bitcoin softwareRun 'bitcoind --version' or 'bitcoin-qt --version' to determine the exact version number of the installed Bitcoin softwareAffected if The version matches any of the affected versions: Bitcoin Core all versions through 0.7.2, Bitcoin-Qt 0.4, 0.4.8, 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, or Bitcoind 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
-
Confirm transaction processing is enabledBy default, the node accepts and processes transactions from the network. Verify the daemon is not in - blocksonly mode or with -txindex disabled by checking configuration files or running parametersAffected if The node is actively processing transactions from the network, which is the default behavior
You are affected if you are running any version of Bitcoin Core, Bitcoin-Qt, or Bitcoind at or below 0.7.2, as the vulnerable CTransaction::FetchInputs code is present in all these versions.
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 Bitcoin-Qt/bitcoind version 0.8.0rc1 or later, which includes the fix for incremental prevout checking during input fetching.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-2293 — 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-2013-2293 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