CVE-2013-2315
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 · unediteddata/class/pages/forgot/LC_Page_Forgot.php in LOCKON EC-CUBE 2.11.0 through 2.12.3enP2 does not properly validate the input to the password reminder function, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information via a crafted 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 · high confidenceThis is an information disclosure vulnerability in the password reminder function of EC-CUBE e-commerce software. The file data/class/pages/forgot/LC_Page_Forgot.php fails to properly validate user input, allowing remote attackers to craft requests that expose sensitive information through the password reset mechanism.
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= 2.11.0= 2.11.1= 2.11.2= 2.11.3= 2.11.4= 2.11.5= 2.12.0= 2.12.1= 2.12.2= 2.12.3= 2.12.3en= 2.12.3enp1CVSS 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.
-
Locate EC-CUBE installation directorySearch for the file structure indicating EC-CUBE, typically in the web root. Look for the data/ directory and common paths like /html/, /www/, or the application root.Affected if EC-CUBE software is present on the server
-
Identify installed EC-CUBE versionCheck for version files. Common locations include a define file in data/class or a version constant. Look for files like data/class/SC_Initial.php, data/class/helper/SC_Helper_DB.php, or a VERSION file in the installation root.Affected if Installed version matches 2.11.0 through 2.12.3enp1 (including 2.11.x, 2.12.0-2.12.3, 2.12.3en, 2.12.3enp1)
-
Verify vulnerable file existsCheck if the file data/class/pages/forgot/LC_Page_Forgot.php exists in the installation. This is the specific file containing the flaw.Affected if The file LC_Page_Forgot.php exists in the forgot directory under data/class/pages/
-
Confirm password reminder feature is accessibleVerify the forgot password functionality is enabled and accessible on the site. Typically accessed via a URL path like /forgot/ or /forgot/index.php, or a "Password Reminder" link on the login page.Affected if The password reminder/forgot password page is publicly accessible and functional on the web server
The environment is affected if EC-CUBE versions 2.11.0 through 2.12.3enp1 are installed with the vulnerable LC_Page_Forgot.php file present and the password reminder feature accessible.
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 dataApply vendor patches for EC-CUBE versions 2.11.0 through 2.12.3enP2, or implement proper input validation and sanitization on the password reminder form fields in LC_Page_Forgot.php to prevent unauthorized information disclosure.
- 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-2013-2315 — 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-2013-2315 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