CVE-2014-3121
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 · uneditedrxvt-unicode before 9.20 does not properly handle OSC escape sequences, which allows user-assisted remote attackers to manipulate arbitrary X window properties and execute arbitrary commands.
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 confidencerxvt-unicode before version 9.20 fails to properly validate OSC (Operating System Command) escape sequences, which are used to communicate with the terminal emulator. This improper handling allows user-assisted remote attackers to manipulate arbitrary X window properties and potentially execute arbitrary commands by tricking users into viewing malicious content in the terminal.
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<= 9.19= 9.0= 9.01= 9.02= 9.05= 9.06= 9.07= 9.08= 9.09= 9.10= 9.11= 9.12CVSS 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
- High
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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.
-
Check if rxvt-unicode is installedRun `which urxvt` or `which rxvt-unicode` on Linux/Unix systems. On Debian/Ubuntu use `dpkg -l | grep rxvt-unicode`. On RHEL/CentOS use `rpm -qa | grep urxvt`.Affected if If the command returns a path to urxvt or rxvt-unicode, the product is present.
-
Determine the installed versionRun `urxvt --version` or `rxvt-unicode --version`. Alternatively, check the package version: `dpkg -l rxvt-unicode` (Debian/Ubuntu) or `rpm -qi urxvt` (RHEL/CentOS).Affected if If no version is returned, try reading the binary directly with `strings /usr/bin/urxvt | grep -i 'version\|urxvt'` or check the package metadata.
-
Compare version against affected rangeReview the version number obtained. The affected versions are: 9.0, 9.01, 9.02, 9.05, 9.06, 9.07, 9.08, 9.09, 9.10, 9.11, 9.12, and any version 9.13 through 9.19. Version 9.20 and later are NOT affected.Affected if If the installed version is 9.19 or lower, or any of the specific versions listed (9.0 through 9.12), the system is running a vulnerable version.
-
Identify active rxvt-unicode processesRun `ps aux | grep urxvt` or `pgrep -a urxvt` to see if the terminal emulator is currently running.Affected if If rxvt-unicode processes are running and the version is vulnerable (from step 3), the vulnerability is present in the active environment.
You are affected if rxvt-unicode (urxvt) version 9.19 or lower, or any of versions 9.0 through 9.12, is installed or running in your environment.
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 rxvt-unicode to version 9.20 or later. Users should avoid rendering untrusted content in terminal windows as a defense-in-depth measure.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,864.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-3121 — 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-2014-3121 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