CVE-2013-2461
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 the Java Runtime Environment (JRE) component in Oracle Java SE 7 Update 21 and earlier and 6 Update 45 and earlier; the Oracle JRockit component in Oracle Fusion Middleware R27.7.5 and earlier and R28.2.7 and earlier; and OpenJDK 7 allows remote attackers to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability via unknown vectors related to Libraries. NOTE: the previous information is from the June and July 2013 CPU. Oracle has not commented on claims from another vendor that this issue allows remote attackers to bypass verification of XML signatures via vectors related to a "Missing check for [a] valid DOMCanonicalizationMethod canonicalization algorithm."
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 confidenceThis vulnerability in the Java Runtime Environment allows remote attackers to bypass XML signature verification due to a missing validation check for a valid DOMCanonicalizationMethod canonicalization algorithm. An attacker could exploit this to forge XML digital signatures that would be incorrectly validated as legitimate, affecting confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
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= 1.7.0= 1.6.0= 1.6.0= 1.7.0>= r27.7.1, <= r27.7.5>= r28.0.0, <= r28.2.7CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/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 installed Java versionRun 'java -version' or check the Java installation directory for version info. For Windows, check registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\JavaSoft\Java Runtime Environment. For Linux, check /usr/lib/jvm/ or use 'rpm -qa | grep jdk'Affected if Version matches Oracle OpenJDK 1.7.0, Oracle JDK 1.6.0, Sun JDK 1.6.0, Oracle JRE 1.7.0, or Oracle JRockit r27.7.1-r27.7.5 or r28.0.0-r28.2.7
-
Determine if XML digital signature verification is in useSearch codebase and configuration files for javax.xml.crypto.dsig references, DigitalSignature or XMLSignature classes, or XML signature-related libraries such as Apache Santuario or Java XML Digital Signature APIAffected if The environment uses Java XML digital signature validation (javax.xml.crypto.dsig) to verify signed XML documents
-
Check if application processes untrusted XML documentsReview application logs, configuration, and source code to identify if XML documents from external or untrusted sources are processed and validatedAffected if The system parses and validates XML signatures from untrusted or external sources
-
Verify JRE/JDK patch levelIf using Oracle Java, check the full update version via 'java -fullversion' which shows build number like '1.7.0_25-b17'Affected if Update version is earlier than 7u25 (for 1.7.x) or earlier than 6u45 (for 1.6.x)
You are affected if your environment runs one of the specific vulnerable Java versions listed AND processes untrusted XML documents with digital signature verification enabled.
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 dataUpdate Java SE to versions 7 Update 25 or later, 6 Update 45 or later, or apply the appropriate Oracle Fusion Middleware / OpenJDK patches. Prioritize systems that process untrusted XML documents with digital signature verification.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-2461 — 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- www.oracle.com
- www.oracle.com
- www.oracle.com
- www.oracle.com
- advisories.mageia.org
- hg.openjdk.java.net
- marc.info
- marc.info
- rhn.redhat.com
- seclists.org
- secunia.com
- security.gentoo.org
- www.mandriva.com
- www.securityfocus.com
- www.securityfocus.com
- www.us-cert.gov
- www.vmware.com
- access.redhat.com
- bugzilla.redhat.com
- oval.cisecurity.org
- oval.cisecurity.org
- oval.cisecurity.org
- nvd.nist.gov
Practitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2013-2461 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