CVE-2013-2329
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 · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in HP Storage Data Protector 6.20, 6.21, 7.00, and 7.01 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via unknown vectors, aka ZDI-CAN-1637.
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 confidenceHP Storage Data Protector versions 6.20, 6.21, 7.00, and 7.01 contain an unspecified vulnerability allowing remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via unknown vectors. The vulnerability is rated critical severity (CVSS 10) and was disclosed through the Zero Day Initiative (ZDI-CAN-1637).
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= 6.20= 6.21= 7.00= 7.01CVSS 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
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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.
-
Confirm HP Storage Data Protector is installedCheck system for presence of HP Storage Data Protector software using system inventory tools, installed programs list, or by searching for Data Protector directories on the system.Affected if HP Storage Data Protector is found on the system
-
Determine installed versionLocate and read the version information for HP Storage Data Protector. Common methods include checking the software's About dialog, reading version files in the installation directory, or querying the installed package through system tools.Affected if The installed version cannot be determined or is not clearly identified
-
Compare version against affected releasesMatch the identified version number exactly to 6.20, 6.21, 7.00, or 7.01.Affected if The installed version exactly matches 6.20, 6.21, 7.00, or 7.01
A system is affected if HP Storage Data Protector is installed and the exact version is one of the following: 6.20, 6.21, 7.00, or 7.01.
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 HP Storage Data Protector to the vendor-supplied patched version. If patching is not immediately possible, isolate affected systems from untrusted networks and monitor for indicators of compromise.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-2329 — 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-2013-2329 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