Anti VirusApplication · F Secure

CVE-2013-7369

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v2.0 Published 2014-04-18
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
SQL injection vulnerability in an unspecified DLL in the FSDBCom ActiveX control in F-Secure Anti-Virus for Microsoft Exchange Server before HF02, Anti-Virus for Windows Servers 9.00 before HF09, Anti-Virus for Citrix Servers 9.00 before HF09, and F-Secure Email and Server Security and F-Secure Server Security 9.20 before HF01 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via unknown vectors, related to GetCommand.

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 confidence

SQL injection vulnerability in the FSDBCom ActiveX control's GetCommand function in multiple F-Secure antivirus products (Exchange Server, Windows Servers, Citrix Servers, Email and Server Security) allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via unspecified vectors.

MitigationApply vendor hotfixes HF02 (Exchange), HF09 (Windows/Citrix Servers), or HF01 (Email/Server Security 9.20) depending on the deployed product version to patch the SQL injection in the FSDBCom ActiveX control.

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
Anti VirusApplication
Affected:= 9.00= 9.10
Email And Server SecurityApplication
Affected:= 9.20
Server SecurityApplication
Affected:= 9.20

CVSS 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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed F-Secure product
    Open Windows Control Panel > Programs and Features, or run 'wmic product get name,version' to list installed software and locate F-Secure Anti Virus, F-Secure Email And Server Security, or F-Secure Server Security
    Affected if The installed product matches any of the affected versions: F Secure Anti Virus 9.00 or 9.10, F Secure Email And Server Security 9.20, or F Secure Server Security 9.20
  2. Confirm ActiveX control presence
    Check for the FSDBCom ActiveX control by searching in the Windows registry under HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT for entries containing 'FSDBCom' or by examining the F-Secure installation directory for the FSDBCom component file (typically in the program files folder under the F-Secure installation)
    Affected if The FSDBCom ActiveX control component exists on the system, indicating the vulnerable component is present
  3. Verify GetCommand function accessibility
    Since this is an ActiveX control, the GetCommand function can be invoked through web browsers or applications that load the control; check browser security settings or application configurations that may allow ActiveX execution
    Affected if The GetCommand function of the FSDBCom ActiveX control is accessible, which is the case by default when the ActiveX control is installed and registered

A user is affected if they have any of the listed F-Secure product versions (9.00, 9.10, or 9.20) installed with the FSDBCom ActiveX control present on their system.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply vendor hotfixes HF02 (Exchange), HF09 (Windows/Citrix Servers), or HF01 (Email/Server Security 9.20) depending on the deployed product version to patch the SQL injection in the FSDBCom ActiveX control.

Fix this in Anti Virus Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
12.0 hours of engineering $2,130
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,408.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-7369 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2013-7369 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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