CVE-2013-3017
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 · uneditedIBM Tivoli Application Dependency Discovery Manager (TADDM) before 7.2.1.5 and 7.2.x before 7.2.2 make it easier for remote attackers to defeat cryptographic protection mechanisms by leveraging support for weak SSL ciphers. IBM X-Force ID: 84353.
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 confidenceIBM Tivoli Application Dependency Discovery Manager (TADDM) versions before 7.2.1.5 and 7.2.x before 7.2.2 support weak SSL cipher suites, allowing remote attackers to potentially break cryptographic protection and intercept or manipulate data in transit.
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>= 7.2.0, < 7.2.1.5= 7.1.2CVSS 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
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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.
-
Identify TADDM installation and versionLocate the TADDM installation directory and find the version information file or use the version command (e.g., 'tddmserver -version' or check version.props in the installation root)Affected if The installed version is 7.1.2 or falls between 7.2.0 and 7.2.1.5 (exclusive of 7.2.1.5)
-
Locate SSL/TLS configurationSearch for SSL configuration files in the TADDM installation directory, typically in conf/ or config/ subdirectories, or access the TADDM management console SSL settingsAffected if Weak SSL cipher configuration files exist and are accessible
-
Examine enabled cipher suitesOpen the SSL configuration file (commonly ssl.properties, server.xml, or similar) and review the list of enabled cipher suitesAffected if The cipher list includes NULL, EXPORT, 40-bit, 56-bit, or other weak cipher suites (e.g., SSL_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_MD5, SSL_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_SHA, TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA) without TLS 1.2 enforcement
-
Check SSL protocol version settingsReview the SSL configuration for allowed protocol versions (SSLv2, SSLv3, TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1)Affected if SSLv2, SSLv3, or TLS 1.0 are enabled as allowed protocols
A user is affected if TADDM version is 7.1.2 or between 7.2.0 and 7.2.1.5 AND weak SSL ciphers (NULL, export, 40-bit, 56-bit) or outdated protocols are enabled in the SSL configuration.
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 data7.2.1.5
Disable weak SSL ciphers (e.g., NULL, export, 40-bit, 56-bit) and configure TADDM to use only strong cipher suites (AES-256, TLS 1.2+) in the SSL/TLS configuration.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-3017 — 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-2013-3017 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