CVE-2013-6829
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 · uneditedadmin/confnetworking.html in PineApp Mail-SeCure allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters in the pinghost parameter during a ping operation.
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 confidenceCommand injection vulnerability in PineApp Mail-SeCure's admin/confnetworking.html page. The pinghost parameter accepts user input without proper sanitization, allowing remote attackers to inject shell metacharacters and execute arbitrary OS commands on the underlying system.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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 if PineApp Mail Secure is installedCheck for PineApp installation directories (typically /usr/local/pineapp or /opt/pineapp) and look for pineapp-related processes running on the system using 'ps aux | grep -i pineapp' or 'ls -la' on common installation paths.Affected if PineApp Mail Secure processes are found running or installation directories exist on the system.
-
Confirm admin interface is accessibleAttempt to access the admin login page at /admin/ or /admin/confnetworking.html on the server's web interface. Check for HTTP response indicating the path exists.Affected if The admin interface returns a valid HTTP response, indicating the web application is accessible.
-
Verify the vulnerable confnetworking.html endpoint existsNavigate to or curl the specific path /admin/confnetworking.html on the PineApp web server. Inspect the page for a ping host input field.Affected if The confnetworking.html page loads and contains a pinghost parameter input field.
-
Check if the pinghost parameter accepts input without sanitizationReview the page source or application logs to observe how the pinghost parameter is handled. If the application directly passes this input to system commands without validation, the vulnerability exists.Affected if The pinghost parameter is passed directly to shell execution without input validation or sanitization.
If PineApp Mail Secure is installed and the admin/confnetworking.html page is accessible with an unprotected pinghost parameter, the system is affected by this command injection vulnerability.
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 dataImplement strict input validation on the pinghost parameter to allow only valid IP addresses or hostnames, and avoid passing user input directly to system calls. Use parameterized methods or whitelist validation instead of shell execution.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-6829 — 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-2013-6829 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