Storage Data ProtectorApplication · Hp

CVE-2013-2333

HIGH · 10.0 CVSS v2.0 Published 2013-06-06
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
High EPSS Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
Unspecified 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-1680.

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 confidence

Critical remote code execution vulnerability in HP Storage Data Protector versions 6.20, 6.21, 7.00, and 7.01 allowing unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via unspecified vectors (ZDI-CAN-1680). The CVSS 10 score indicates a trivially exploitable, network-accessible flaw with complete system compromise potential.

MitigationUpgrade to a patched HP Storage Data Protector version beyond 7.01. If immediate patching is not possible, restrict network access to Data Protector services and implement additional network segmentation as a compensating control until the upgrade can be performed.

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
Storage Data ProtectorApplication
Affected:= 6.20= 6.21= 7.00= 7.01

CVSS 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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify if HP Storage Data Protector is installed
    Query system inventory, installed software lists, or application directories for HP Storage Data Protector. On Windows, check Add/Remove Programs or the installation directory. On Unix/Linux, check package management tools or common installation paths.
    Affected if HP Storage Data Protector is found on the system
  2. Determine the installed version
    Use the product's version-checking mechanism, such as the omnir command (omnir -version), checking the installation directory for version files, or reviewing product documentation for version identification methods.
    Affected if The version returned matches exactly 6.20, 6.21, 7.00, or 7.01
  3. Verify network exposure of Data Protector services
    Check which network ports and services HP Storage Data Protector exposes. Review firewall rules and network configurations to determine if the Data Protector services are accessible from untrusted networks.
    Affected if Data Protector services are reachable from network segments that contain untrusted or anonymous users
  4. Confirm the exploitation vector availability
    Review Data Protector configuration to determine if the vulnerable service or feature (unspecified in the CVE) is enabled and accessible. Check service startup configurations and enabled modules.
    Affected if The vulnerable component or service is active and accepts remote connections without authentication

A system is affected if HP Storage Data Protector version 6.20, 6.21, 7.00, or 7.01 is installed and the vulnerable service is network-accessible to unauthenticated users.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade to a patched HP Storage Data Protector version beyond 7.01. If immediate patching is not possible, restrict network access to Data Protector services and implement additional network segmentation as a compensating control until the upgrade can be performed.

Fix this in Storage Data Protector Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation8.0 h
  • Implementation16.0 h
  • Testing12.0 h
  • Review / QA8.0 h
44.0 hours of engineering $7,720
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $12,352.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-2333 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2013-2333 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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