CVE-2013-5443
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 · uneditedCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in IBM Cognos Express 9.0 before IFIX 2, 9.5 before IFIX 2, 10.1 before IFIX 2, and 10.2.1 before FP1 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users.
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 confidenceCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in IBM Cognos Express allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users by tricking authenticated users into unknowingly submitting malicious requests to the application.
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= 9.0= 9.5= 10.1= 10.2.1CVSS 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 the installed IBM Cognos Express versionAccess the Cognos Express administration console or check the product information panel within the application. The version is typically displayed in the About section or can be retrieved via the Cognos Configuration tool.Affected if The installed version is exactly 9.0, 9.5, 10.1, or 10.2.1 (the versions listed as affected).
-
Check for anti-CSRF token implementation in web requestsInspect the HTML source of Cognos Express pages, specifically login and form submission pages. Look for hidden input fields containing token values or unique session identifiers that are submitted with state-changing requests.Affected if No anti-CSRF tokens are present in forms, meaning the application lacks token-based CSRF protection.
-
Verify SameSite cookie attributes are configuredUse browser developer tools or a proxy to intercept HTTP responses from Cognos Express. Examine the Set-Cookie headers to determine if the SameSite attribute is set to Strict or Lax for session cookies.Affected if Session cookies lack SameSite attribute or have it set to None, leaving them vulnerable to CSRF attacks.
-
Confirm CSRF validation is enforced on state-changing operationsAttempt to submit a state-changing request (such as modifying user settings or executing a report) without the expected session tokens or anti-CSRF mechanisms. Observe if the application accepts the request without validating the request origin.Affected if The application accepts and processes state-changing requests without validating the request origin or requiring anti-CSRF tokens.
A user is affected if their installed IBM Cognos Express version is exactly 9.0, 9.5, 10.1, or 10.2.1 AND the application is missing anti-CSRF token validation or SameSite cookie protections for session handling.
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 dataApply the vendor-supplied IFIX updates (IFIX 2 for versions 9.0, 9.5, 10.1; FP1 for version 10.2.1) which include anti-CSRF token implementations or same-site request validation.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,680.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-5443 — 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-2013-5443 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