ActivemqApplication · Apache
CVE-2014-3612
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 LDAPLoginModule implementation in the Java Authentication and Authorization Service (JAAS) in Apache ActiveMQ 5.x before 5.10.1 allows remote attackers to bypass authentication by logging in with an empty password and valid username, which triggers an unauthenticated bind. NOTE: this identifier has been SPLIT per ADT2 due to different vulnerability types. See CVE-2015-6524 for the use of wildcard operators in usernames.
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 LDAPLoginModule in Apache ActiveMQ versions 5.x before 5.10.1 allows remote attackers to bypass authentication by providing an empty password with a valid username. This triggers an unauthenticated bind to the LDAP directory, effectively granting access without knowing the actual password.
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
ActivemqApplication
= 5.0.0= 5.1.0= 5.2.0= 5.3.0= 5.3.1= 5.3.2= 5.4.0= 5.4.1= 5.4.2= 5.4.3= 5.5.0= 5.5.1CVSS 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify ActiveMQ versionRun 'activemq --version' or inspect the version file in the ActiveMQ installation directoryAffected if The installed version is 5.0.0 through 5.5.1 (any 5.x version before 5.10.1)
-
Locate JAAS configurationFind the JAAS login configuration file referenced by ActiveMQ, typically named login.config or jaas.conf, and check the ActiveMQ startup scripts for the -Djava.security.auth.login.config propertyAffected if A JAAS configuration file is in use and defines the LDAPLoginModule
-
Verify LDAPLoginModule is enabledInspect the JAAS configuration file and confirm the LDAPLoginModule is configured as an authentication moduleAffected if The JAAS configuration uses org.apache.activemq.jaas.LDAPLoginModule or similar LDAP login module
-
Check empty password handlingReview the LDAPLoginModule configuration properties for any setting that controls empty password behavior, such as emptyPasswordAllowed or similar optionsAffected if The configuration does not explicitly reject empty passwords or does not set a property to prevent empty password binds
You are affected if you run any ActiveMQ version between 5.0.0 and 5.5.1 and have the LDAPLoginModule configured in JAAS without explicit rejection of empty password authentication attempts.
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 Apache ActiveMQ 5.10.1 or later, or configure the LDAPLoginModule to reject empty password authentication attempts in the JAAS configuration.
Fix this in Activemq
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-3612 — 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-2014-3612 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