OpenshiftApplication · Redhat
CVE-2013-4364
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(1) oo-analytics-export and (2) oo-analytics-import in the openshift-origin-broker-util package in Red Hat OpenShift Enterprise 1 and 2 allow local users to have unspecified impact via a symlink attack on an unspecified file in /tmp.
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 oo-analytics-export and oo-analytics-import utilities in the openshift-origin-broker-util package for Red Hat OpenShift Enterprise 1 and 2 create or manipulate files in /tmp without proper validation, allowing local users to exploit symlink attacks to overwrite or manipulate unspecified files with elevated privileges.
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
OpenshiftApplication
= 1.0= 2.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 if openshift-origin-broker-util package is installedRun: rpm -q openshift-origin-broker-util (RHEL-based) or dpkg -l openshift-origin-broker-util (Debian-based)Affected if The package is installed and returned by the query
-
Verify the package version is 1.0 or 2.0Run: rpm -q --qf '%{VERSION}' openshift-origin-broker-utilAffected if The version returned equals 1.0 or 2.0, matching the affected versions
-
Check if oo-analytics-export utility existsRun: which oo-analytics-export or ls -la /usr/bin/oo-analytics-export /usr/sbin/oo-analytics-export 2>/dev/nullAffected if The binary or script exists on the system
-
Check if oo-analytics-import utility existsRun: which oo-analytics-import or ls -la /usr/bin/oo-analytics-import /usr/sbin/oo-analytics-import 2>/dev/nullAffected if The binary or script exists on the system
-
Inspect scripts for insecure /tmp file operationsExamine the scripts using: grep -n '/tmp' $(which oo-analytics-export) $(which oo-analytics-import) 2>/dev/nullAffected if The utilities create or manipulate files in /tmp without using O_EXCL, mktemp, or umask 077
The environment is affected if openshift-origin-broker-util version 1.0 or 2.0 is installed AND the oo-analytics-export or oo-analytics-import utilities exist and perform insecure file operations in /tmp.
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 dataReplace insecure temporary file operations with secure methods such as mktemp, use O_EXCL flag, set appropriate file permissions (umask 077), or remove/rename the vulnerable scripts if unused. Consider upgrading to a patched version if available.
Fix this in Openshift
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-4364 — 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-2013-4364 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