lib/rexml/text.rb in the REXML parser in Ruby before 1.9.3-p392 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption and
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 22/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 6.8% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 94% of all records.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: ruby1.8 (Debian:6.0) 1.8.7.302-2squeeze2; ruby1.9.1 (Debian:6.0) 1.9.2.0-2+deb6u1; ruby1.8 (Debian:7) 1.8.7.358-7.1+deb7u1.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to ruby1.8 (Debian:6.0) 1.8.7.302-2squeeze2; ruby1.9.1 (Debian:6.0) 1.9.2.0-2+deb6u1; ruby1.8 (Debian:7) 1.8.7.358-7.1+deb7u1 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
lib/rexml/text.rb in the REXML parser in Ruby before 1.9.3-p392 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption and crash) via crafted text nodes in an XML document, aka an XML Entity Expansion (XEE) attack.
- Published
- Apr 9, 2013
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 6.8% · 94th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-20
Report tools
Action score
22
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 20 / 40 · 5.0 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 2 / 30 · 6.8%
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| ruby-lang | ruby | cpe:2.3:a:ruby-lang:ruby |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- ruby-lang rubyup to 1.9.3 inclusive
- ruby-lang ruby1.9
- ruby-lang ruby1.9.1
- ruby-lang ruby1.9.2
- ruby-lang ruby1.9.3
- ruby-lang ruby2.0
- ruby-lang ruby2.0.0
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian:6.0 | ruby1.8 | before 1.8.7.302-2squeeze2 | 1.8.7.302-2squeeze2 |
| Debian:6.0 | ruby1.9.1 | before 1.9.2.0-2+deb6u1 | 1.9.2.0-2+deb6u1 |
| Debian:7 | ruby1.8 | before 1.8.7.358-7.1+deb7u1 | 1.8.7.358-7.1+deb7u1 |
| Debian:7 | ruby1.9.1 | before 1.9.3.194-8.1+deb7u1 | 1.9.3.194-8.1+deb7u1 |
| Maven | org.jruby:jruby | before 1.7.3 | 1.7.3 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | ruby | before 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | ruby-debuginfo | before 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | ruby-devel | before 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | ruby-docs | before 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | ruby-irb | before 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | ruby-libs | before 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | ruby-mode | before 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | ruby-rdoc | before 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | ruby-ri | before 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | ruby-tcltk | before 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:6::client | ruby | before 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 | 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:6::client | ruby-debuginfo | before 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 | 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:6::client | ruby-devel | before 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 | 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:6::client | ruby-docs | before 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 | 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:6::client | ruby-irb | before 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 | 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:6::client | ruby-libs | before 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 | 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:6::client | ruby-rdoc | before 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 | 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:6::client | ruby-ri | before 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 | 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:6::client | ruby-static | before 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 | 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 |
+19
Same product
ruby-lang: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2017-17405Ruby before 2.4.3 allows Net::FTP command injection.57Plan
- CVE-2008-3656Algorithmic complexity vulnerability in the WEBrick::HTTPUtils.split_header_value function in WEBrick::HTTP::DefaultFileHandler in WEBrick i52Plan
- CVE-2021-28966In Ruby through 3.0 on Windows, a remote attacker can submit a crafted path when a Web application handles a parameter with TmpDir.47Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2012-4522Nov 24, 2012 · The rb_get_path_check function in file.c in Ruby 1.9.3 before patchlevel 286 and Ruby 2.0.0 before r37163 allows context-dependent attackers21Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2012-5371Nov 28, 2012 · Ruby (aka CRuby) 1.9 before 1.9.3-p327 and 2.0 before r37575 computes hash values without properly restricting the ability to trigger hash c21Monitor
- Later →CVE-2012-4464Apr 25, 2013 · Ruby 1.9.3 before patchlevel 286 and 2.0 before revision r37068 allows context-dependent attackers to bypass safe-level restrictions and mod21Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| debian:ruby1.8 | 1.8.7.302-2squeeze2 · Debian:6.0 | Package registry (OSV) |
| debian:ruby1.9.1 | 1.9.2.0-2+deb6u1 · Debian:6.0 | Package registry (OSV) |
| Maven:org.jruby:jruby | 1.7.3 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby-debuginfo | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby-devel | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby-docs | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby-irb | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby-libs | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby-mode | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby-rdoc | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby-ri | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby-static | 0:1.8.7.352-10.el6_4 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:6::client | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby-tcltk | 0:1.8.5-29.el5_9 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:5::server | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:ruby3.3 | 0:3.3.10-23.1.hum1 · Red Hat:hummingbird:1 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
The product’s vendor appears in a public program. Matched by name; verify the scope text in the program.
Technical details
Attack conditions
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- none
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- P · the service can be disrupted
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- P
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-20 · Improper Input ValidationCVSS vector
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Buffer Overflow via Environment VariablesCAPEC-10likelihood: High · High
- Server Side Include (SSI) InjectionCAPEC-101likelihood: High · High
- Cross Zone ScriptingCAPEC-104likelihood: Medium · High
- Command Line Execution through SQL InjectionCAPEC-108likelihood: Low · Very High
- Object Relational Mapping InjectionCAPEC-109likelihood: Low · High
- SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter TamperingCAPEC-110likelihood: High · Very High
- Double EncodingCAPEC-120likelihood: Low · Medium
- Subverting Environment Variable ValuesCAPEC-13likelihood: High · Very High
ATT&CK techniques
- Obfuscated Files or InformationT1027
- Masquerading: Invalid Code SignatureT1036.001
- Steal Web Session CookieT1539
- Subvert Trust Controls: Code SigningT1553.002
- Impair Defenses:Impair Command History LoggingT1562.003
- Hijack Execution Flow:Dynamic Linker HijackingT1574.006
- Hijack Execution Flow:Path Interception by PATH Environment VariableT1574.007
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (19 more)Show less
- lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2013-04/msg00001.html
- lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2013-04/msg00015.html
- lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-updates/2013-04/msg00034.html
- lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-updates/2013-04/msg00036.html
- rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-0611.html
- rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-0612.html
- rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-1028.html
- rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-1147.html
- secunia.com/advisories/52783
- secunia.com/advisories/52902
- svn.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi?view=revision&revision=39384
- www.debian.org/security/2013/dsa-2738
- www.debian.org/security/2013/dsa-2809
- www.mandriva.com/security/advisories?name=MDVSA-2013:124
- www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2013/03/06/5
- www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/bulletinjul2015-2511963.html
- www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2013/02/22/rexml-dos-2013-02-22/
- www.securityfocus.com/bid/58141
- www.slackware.com/security/viewer.php?l=slackware-security&y=2013&m=slackware-security.426862
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.