CVE-2013-7386
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 · uneditedFormat string vulnerability in the PROJECT::write_account_file function in client/cs_account.cpp in BOINC, possibly 7.2.33, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code via format string specifiers in the gui_urls item in an account file.
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 · moderate confidenceA format string vulnerability exists in the PROJECT::write_account_file function in client/cs_account.cpp in BOINC. The gui_urls field from an account file is directly used as a format string parameter without sanitization, allowing attackers to inject format specifiers (like %s, %x) that can crash the application or potentially execute arbitrary code.
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= 7.2.33CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Verify BOINC client versionRun 'boinc --version' or check the installed package version using your system's package manager (dpkg, rpm, etc.)Affected if The installed version is exactly 7.2.33
-
Locate BOINC account filesFind account files in the BOINC data directory (typically contains account_*.xml files with project credentials)Affected if Account files exist and contain a gui_urls field
-
Inspect gui_urls field contentOpen account files and examine the gui_urls XML element for any format string specifiers such as %s, %x, %n, %p, or any %-based patternsAffected if The gui_urls field contains unescaped format specifiers like %s or %x (not just literal URL text)
-
Verify write_account_file function usageCheck if the BOINC client has write access to account files and would trigger the write_account_file function during normal operation (e.g., project attachment, account file update)Affected if The client can write to account files and the vulnerable code path is reachable
You are affected if running BOINC Client version 7.2.33 and your account files contain format string specifiers in the gui_urls field that would be processed by the vulnerable write_account_file function.
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 dataSanitize user-controlled input (gui_urls) before using it in format string functions; use %s placeholder or proper input validation to treat all user input as literal strings rather than format specifiers.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-7386 — 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-2013-7386 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