CVE-2013-5375
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 · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in IBM Java SDK 7.0.0 before SR6, 6.0.1 before SR7, 6.0.0 before SR15, and 5.0.0 before SR16 FP4 allows remote attackers to access restricted classes via unspecified vectors related to XML and XSL.
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 confidenceVulnerability in IBM Java SDK allows remote attackers to bypass access restrictions on certain classes through unspecified vectors involving XML and XSL processing. The flaw exists in multiple older versions of IBM's Java implementation across the 5.0, 6.0, and 7.0 release trains.
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= 5.0.0.0= 6.0.0.0= 6.0.1.0= 7.0.0.0CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/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 IBM Java installationRun 'java -version' and examine the output. Look for 'IBM' or 'J9' in the version string, as this indicates IBM Java rather than Oracle/OpenJDK.Affected if The output does not contain 'IBM' or 'J9' - the system is using a different Java implementation and is not affected by this CVE.
-
Determine IBM Java version numberRun 'java -version' and note the full version string (e.g., 5.0.0.0, 6.0.0.0, 6.0.1.0, 7.0.0.0). For IBM Java 5, 6, and 7, the format typically shows the base release followed by SR (Service Release) information.Affected if The version shows 5.0.0.0 through 5.0.0.SR15, 6.0.0.0 through 6.0.0.SR14, 6.1.0.0 through 6.1.0.SR6, or 7.0.0.0 through 7.0.0.SR5 - these are affected versions before the patched service releases were issued.
-
Verify XML/XSL processing is in useSearch application code and configuration for XML processing imports (javax.xml.*, org.w3c.*, org.xml.sax.*) and XSLT usage (javax.xml.transform, transformer configurations). Check deployment descriptors and application dependencies for XML libraries.Affected if This CVE specifically affects XML and XSL processing in IBM Java. Systems without XML/XSL functionality are unlikely to be exploitable, but the vulnerable code is present in the SDK regardless.
If running IBM Java versions 5.0.0.0 through 5.0.0.SR15, 6.0.0.0 through 6.0.0.SR14, 6.1.0.0 through 6.1.0.SR6, or 7.0.0.0 through 7.0.0.SR5, the environment is vulnerable and should be updated to the patched service releases.
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 dataUpdate IBM Java SDK to the patched service release levels: SR6 for version 7.0.0, SR7 for 6.0.1, SR15 for 6.0.0, or SR16 FP4 for version 5.0.0. Test XML/XSL functionality after the update.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing16.0 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 $8,576.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-5375 — 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-2013-5375 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