CVE-2013-6487
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 · uneditedInteger overflow in libpurple/protocols/gg/lib/http.c in the Gadu-Gadu (gg) parser in Pidgin before 2.10.8 allows remote attackers to have an unspecified impact via a large Content-Length value, which triggers a buffer overflow.
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 confidenceInteger overflow vulnerability in the Gadu-Gadu (gg) protocol parser in Pidgin. When parsing HTTP responses, the code fails to properly validate Content-Length header values, allowing a large value to cause a buffer overflow during memory allocation.
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<= 2.10.7= 2.0.0= 2.0.1= 2.0.2= 2.1.0= 2.1.1= 2.10.0= 2.10.1= 2.10.2= 2.10.3= 2.10.4= 2.10.5CVSS 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.
-
Confirm Pidgin is installedCheck if the Pidgin instant messaging client is present on the system. On Linux, run 'which pidgin' or check package manager. On Windows, look for pidgin.exe in Program Files or search the start menu.Affected if Pidgin is installed and the version cannot be determined or is in the affected range
-
Determine installed Pidgin versionRun 'pidgin --version' from command line, or right-click pidgin.exe and select Properties > Details to view File Version. On Linux, also try 'dpkg -l | grep pidgin' or 'rpm -qa | grep pidgin'.Affected if The version returned is 2.10.7 or lower, or matches any of these: 2.0.0, 2.0.1, 2.0.2, 2.1.0, 2.1.1, 2.10.0, 2.10.1, 2.10.2, 2.10.3, 2.10.4, 2.10.5
-
Check if Gadu-Gadu protocol is enabledLaunch Pidgin, go to Accounts > Manage Accounts. Look for any account using the Gadu-Gadu protocol (labeled 'Gadu-Gadu' or 'GG'). Alternatively, check for presence of libgg.dll or gg.dll in the Pidgin program directory.Affected if A Gadu-Gadu account is configured and enabled in Pidgin
-
Inspect Gadu-Gadu protocol libraryLocate the gg protocol plugin. On Linux this is typically libgg.so in /usr/lib/pidgin/ or ~/.pidgin/. On Windows look for gg.dll in the Pidgin plugins folder.Affected if The gg protocol plugin exists and corresponds to a vulnerable Pidgin installation
You are affected if Pidgin version 2.10.7 or lower is installed AND the Gadu-Gadu protocol plugin is present and enabled.
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 to Pidgin version 2.10.8 or later which includes proper bounds checking for Content-Length values in the HTTP parser.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-6487 — 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-2013-6487 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