CVE-2014-3465
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 · uneditedThe gnutls_x509_dn_oid_name function in lib/x509/common.c in GnuTLS 3.0 before 3.1.20 and 3.2.x before 3.2.10 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference) via a crafted X.509 certificate, related to a missing LDAP description for an OID when printing the DN.
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 confidenceThe gnutls_x509_dn_oid_name function in lib/x509/common.c in GnuTLS 3.0 before 3.1.20 and 3.2.x before 3.2.10 suffers from a NULL pointer dereference when processing crafted X.509 certificates. The vulnerability occurs because the function lacks proper handling for a missing LDAP description for an OID when printing the Distinguished Name (DN), leading to denial of service.
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= 3.0.0= 3.0.1= 3.0.2= 3.0.3= 3.0.4= 3.0.5= 3.0.6= 3.0.7= 3.0.8= 3.0.9= 3.0.10= 3.0.11CVSS 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.
-
Check installed GnuTLS versionRun 'gnutls-cli --version' or check the library version via package manager (dpkg -l libgnutls* or rpm -q gnutls)Affected if Version is 3.0.0 through 3.0.11, or 3.1.x before 3.1.20, or 3.2.x before 3.2.10
-
Identify processes using GnuTLSRun 'ldd <executable>' or check loaded libraries via 'cat /proc/<pid>/maps' for processes that link against libgnutlsAffected if Processes link against a vulnerable libgnutls library version
-
Verify X.509 certificate processing occursCheck application logs, configuration, or code for calls to gnutls_x509_crt_import, gnutls_x509_crt_verify, or similar X.509 certificate functionsAffected if Application processes X.509 certificates from untrusted sources
-
Confirm DN printing is triggeredMonitor for code paths that call gnutls_x509_dn_oid_name or print Distinguished Name information from certificatesAffected if Application invokes functions that trigger the vulnerable gnutls_x509_dn_oid_name code path
You are affected if running a GnuTLS version in the 3.0.x (3.0.0-3.0.11), 3.1.x (<3.1.20), or 3.2.x (<3.2.10) range AND your application processes X.509 certificates that trigger the DN printing code path.
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 to GnuTLS version 3.1.20, 3.2.10, or later. Additionally, ensure untrusted or unverified X.509 certificates are not processed without proper validation to avoid triggering the vulnerability.
- 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-2014-3465 — 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-2014-3465 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