CVE-2013-3271
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 · uneditedEMC RSA Authentication Agent for PAM 7.0 before 7.0.2.1 enforces the maximum number of login attempts within the PAM-enabled application codebase, instead of within the Agent codebase, which makes it easier for remote attackers to discover correct login credentials via a brute-force attack.
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 confidenceThe RSA Authentication Agent for PAM 7.0 before version 7.0.2.1 fails to enforce maximum login attempt limits within the Agent itself, instead delegating this critical security control to the PAM-enabled application. This architectural flaw allows attackers to bypass or evade application-level protections by targeting the authentication agent directly, facilitating brute-force credential attacks.
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= 7.0.0= 7.0.1= 7.0.2CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Check RSA Authentication Agent for PAM package versionRun 'rpm -qa | grep -i rsa' or 'dpkg -l | grep -i rsa' to list installed RSA packages and their version numbersAffected if The package version shows 7.0.0, 7.0.1, or 7.0.2
-
Inspect RSA agent binary versionRun '/opt/rsa/auth/bin/dsatool -v' or check the version using the agent's command-line tool if available, or inspect the binary with 'file' and check propertiesAffected if The binary version reports 7.0.0, 7.0.1, or 7.0.2
-
Review RSA Agent configuration directoryExamine /opt/rsa/auth/ or /etc/rsaauth/ for version information in config files, readme files, or version manifestsAffected if Documentation or config files indicate version 7.0.0-7.0.2 range
-
Query running RSA Authentication Agent serviceUse 'ps aux | grep ds_a' or check the running process arguments to identify the agent version being usedAffected if The running agent process corresponds to version 7.0.0, 7.0.1, or 7.0.2
If the installed RSA Authentication Agent for PAM version is 7.0.0, 7.0.1, or 7.0.2, the environment is affected because the agent does not enforce maximum login attempt limits internally.
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 to EMC RSA Authentication Agent for PAM 7.0.2.1 or later to ensure account lockout and attempt limiting are enforced within the Agent codebase. Additionally, implement network-level rate limiting as a defense-in-depth measure.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-3271 — 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-2013-3271 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