CVE-2014-3068
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 · uneditedIBM Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 7 R1 before SR1 FP1 (7.1.1.1), 7 before SR7 FP1 (7.0.7.1), 6 R1 before SR8 FP1 (6.1.8.1), 6 before SR16 FP1 (6.0.16.1), and before 5.0 SR16 FP7 (5.0.16.7) allows attackers to obtain the private key from a Certificate Management System (CMS) keystore via a brute force attack.
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 confidenceIBM JRE versions prior to the specified fix levels contain a vulnerability in the Certificate Management System (CMS) keystore where insufficient key derivation or weak encryption allows attackers to perform brute force attacks and obtain private keys from the keystore.
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= 5.0.0.0= 5.0.11.0= 5.0.11.1= 5.0.11.2= 5.0.12.0= 5.0.12.1= 5.0.12.2= 5.0.12.3= 5.0.12.4= 5.0.12.5= 5.0.13.0= 5.0.14.0CVSS 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
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N
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 IBM JRE installation and versionRun 'java -version' from the command line and examine the output. Look for 'IBM JRE' or 'IBM Corporation' in the vendor string, and note the version number displayed (for example: JRE 5.0 Build).Affected if The installed JRE shows as IBM JRE version 5.0.x matching one of the affected versions (5.0.0.0 through 5.0.14.0)
-
Confirm Java 5.0 series version numberRun 'java -fullversion' if available, or check the java.runtime.version property with 'java -XshowSettings:all 2>&1 | grep version'. Compare the full version string against the specific affected releases: 5.0.0.0, 5.0.11.0, 5.0.11.1, 5.0.11.2, 5.0.12.0, 5.0.12.1, 5.0.12.2, 5.0.12.3, 5.0.12.4, 5.0.12.5, 5.0.13.0, or 5.0.14.0.Affected if The full version matches any of the 5.0.x versions listed in the affected products
-
Check for CMS keystore usageSearch configuration files (such as server.xml, wasconfig, or application properties) for '-storetype CMS' or 'KeyStore.type=CMS' settings. Also review any Java keytool commands that specify '-storetype CMS' or reference a CMS keystore file.Affected if CMS (Certificate Management System) keystore type is configured or in use for storing SSL/TLS private keys
You are affected if you are running IBM JRE version 5.0.0.0 through 5.0.14.0 AND using the CMS keystore to store private keys.
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 IBM JRE to version 7 R1 SR1 FP1 or later, 7 SR7 FP1 or later, 6 R1 SR8 FP1 or later, 6 SR16 FP1 or later, or 5.0 SR16 FP7 or later. Consider implementing rate limiting or account lockout on systems using affected keystores as an interim measure.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-3068 — 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-2014-3068 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