CVE-2013-3500
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 · uneditedThe Foundation webapp admin interface in GroundWork Monitor Enterprise 6.7.0 uses the nagios account as the owner of writable files under /usr/local/groundwork, which allows context-dependent attackers to bypass intended filesystem restrictions by leveraging access to a GroundWork script.
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 confidenceThe GroundWork Monitor Enterprise 6.7.0 Foundation webapp admin interface incorrectly uses the 'nagios' system account as the owner of writable files under /usr/local/groundwork. This misconfiguration allows context-dependent attackers who have access to GroundWork scripts to bypass intended filesystem restrictions and potentially modify or access files they should not be able to touch.
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= 6.7.0CVSS 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.
-
Verify GroundWork Monitor versionRun: gwos --version or check /usr/local/groundwork/version.info 2>/dev/nullAffected if Version equals 6.7.0 exactly
-
Confirm /usr/local/groundwork directory existsRun: ls -ld /usr/local/groundworkAffected if Directory exists and is present on the system
-
Identify files owned by nagios account under /usr/local/groundworkRun: find /usr/local/groundwork -user nagios -type f 2>/dev/nullAffected if Any files are found owned by the nagios user
-
Check if nagios-owned files have writable permissionsRun: find /usr/local/groundwork -user nagios -perm -u+w -type f 2>/dev/nullAffected if Files owned by nagios have write permissions set
-
Verify admin webapp is accessibleCheck if the Foundation webapp admin interface is enabled: grep -r 'admin' /usr/local/groundwork/foundation/container/*/conf/server.xml 2>/dev/null | head -5Affected if Admin interface configuration files exist under /usr/local/groundwork/foundation
The environment is affected if GroundWork Monitor 6.7.0 is installed AND writable files under /usr/local/groundwork are owned by the nagios system account, allowing potential privilege escalation via the admin interface.
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 dataReview and correct file ownership and permissions under /usr/local/groundwork to ensure the nagios account does not own writable files used by the admin interface. Implement proper separation between system service accounts and administrative webapp functions.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-3500 — 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-2013-3500 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