CVE-2013-5350
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 "Remember me" feature in the opSecurityUser::getRememberLoginCookie function in lib/user/opSecurityUser.class.php in OpenPNE 3.6.13 before 3.6.13.1 and 3.8.9 before 3.8.9.1 does not properly validate login data in HTTP Cookie headers, which allows remote attackers to conduct PHP object injection attacks, and execute arbitrary PHP code, via a crafted serialized object.
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 confidenceOpenPNE 3.6.x before 3.6.13.1 and 3.8.x before 3.8.9.1 contains a PHP object injection vulnerability in the opSecurityUser::getRememberLoginCookie function. The Remember Me feature deserializes cookie data without proper validation, allowing attackers to inject malicious serialized PHP objects via crafted HTTP Cookie headers and achieve remote code execution.
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= 3.6.13= 3.8.9CVSS 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 OpenPNE versionLocate the version file or configuration file in your OpenPNE installation (commonly config/ProjectConfiguration.class.php or a version file in the root directory) and read the version numberAffected if version is 3.6.x before 3.6.13.1 or 3.8.x before 3.8.9.1
-
Locate opSecurityUser.class.phpFind the file opSecurityUser.class.php within your OpenPNE installation, typically in lib/user/ or apps/pc_frontend/lib/ directoryAffected if file exists and contains the getRememberLoginCookie function
-
Inspect the getRememberLoginCookie functionOpen opSecurityUser.class.php and examine the getRememberLoginCookie method for lack of proper validation or unserialize() calls on raw cookie dataAffected if the function directly uses unserialize() on cookie values without validation (unpatched version)
-
Check if Remember Me is enabledReview your OpenPNE configuration files (config/app.yml or similar) for the 'remember_me' or 'remember_login' setting and verify whether it is enabledAffected if Remember Me feature is enabled and the version is vulnerable
You are affected if your OpenPNE version is 3.6.x before 3.6.13.1 or 3.8.x before 3.8.9.1 AND the Remember Me functionality is enabled in your 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 dataUpgrade OpenPNE to version 3.6.13.1 or 3.8.9.1 or later, which contains the patched opSecurityUser.class.php with proper cookie validation. If immediate patching is not possible, consider disabling the Remember Me functionality as a temporary mitigation.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-5350 — 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-2013-5350 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