Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2014-0831· NVD / CVE Program· CNA ibm

Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the OAC component in IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) 2.0 before 2.0.0.3 allows re

Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the OAC component in IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) 2.0 before 2.0.0.3 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests that modify configuration data.

MediumCVSS 6.8 · v2.0—No exploit No fix recorded
Published
Feb 1, 2014
Updated
Jun 16, 2026
EPSS
0.6% · 48th percentile
Follow this CVE

Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.

Report tools

JSON

Action score

27

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
27 / 40 · 6.8 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 0.6%

Affected systems

VendorProduct
ibmfinancial transaction manager

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • ibm financial transaction manager2.0.0.0
  • ibm financial transaction manager2.0.0.1
  • ibm financial transaction manager2.0.0.2

Same product

ibm: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2019-4575IBM Financial Transaction Manager for Digital Payments for Multi-Platform 3.2.0 through 3.2.9 is vulnerable to SQL injection.
    39Monitor
  • CVE-2019-4032IBM Financial Transaction Manager for Digital Payments for Multi-Platform 3.1.0 is vulnerable to SQL injection.
    39Monitor
  • CVE-2020-5003IBM Financial Transaction Manager 3.2.4 is vulnerable to an XML External Entity Injection (XXE) attack when processing XML data.
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2023-35892IBM Financial Transaction Manager for SWIFT Services XML external entity injection
    36Monitor
  • CVE-2020-5002IBM Financial Transaction Manager security bypass
    35Monitor
  • CVE-2021-39066IBM Financial Transaction Manager 3.2.4 does not invalidate session any existing session identifier gives an attacker the opportunity to ste
    35Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.

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.

EPSS, last 120 days

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 researchers

Finders, 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

    If successful

    Confidentiality
    P · data can be read
    Integrity
    P · data or configuration can be modified
    Availability
    P · the service can be disrupted
    Attack complexity
    M
    Confidentiality impact
    P
    Integrity impact
    P
    Availability impact
    P

    Weakness class (CWE)

    CWE-352 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

    CVSS vector

    AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P

    nvd-primary

    Root cause

    State-changing requests rely on the session cookie the browser sends automatically; nothing verifies that the request came from the user’s own page.

    The bug in code

    The whole CWE-352 class

    A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

    Vulnerable

    ts
    app.use(session({ cookie: { httpOnly: true } }));app.post("/account/address", updateAddress);

    Fixed

    ts
    app.use(session({ cookie: { httpOnly: true, sameSite: "lax" } }));app.post("/account/address", csrfProtection, updateAddress);

    Attack context

    MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

    ATT&CK techniques

    —

    Noroxi analysis

    No Noroxi analysis for this record yet

    We don't hand-write analysis for all 385,000+ vulnerabilities; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.

    We use this product, ask for help

    Change log

    No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.

    References

    Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

    All records