Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2013-1690 is a high-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Suse Linux Enterprise Server. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Process Injection (T1055); ranked in the top 0.7% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
Mozilla Firefox versions before 22.0, Firefox ESR 17.x versions before 17.0.7, Thunderbird versions before 17.0.7, and Thunderbird ESR 17.x versions before 17.0.7 contain a memory safety flaw stemming from improper handling of onreadystatechange events in combination with page reloading. The issue, tracked as CWE-119, can trigger an attempt to execute data at an unmapped memory location.
Remote attackers may exploit the vulnerability by serving a crafted web page to a user who visits the site in an affected browser or mail client. Successful exploitation can result in an application crash or arbitrary code execution with the privileges of the user running the software.
OpenSUSE security advisories for this issue direct administrators to apply updated packages that correct the handling of these events in the listed Mozilla products.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2013-1717
Vulnerability Data
Mozilla Firefox before 22.0, Firefox ESR 17.x before 17.0.7, Thunderbird before 17.0.7, and Thunderbird ESR 17.x before 17.0.7 do not properly handle onreadystatechange events in conjunction with page reloading, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application…
more
crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a crafted web site that triggers an attempt to execute data at an unmapped memory location.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 28 March 2022
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Ongoing control assessments and code testing (static/dynamic analysis, fuzzing) surface memory buffer restriction failures, which are then remediated before release.
Managed runtimes used by platform-independent applications (e.g., JVM, CLR) enforce memory safety, preventing most buffer overflows that require direct memory manipulation.
Memory protections (e.g., W^X, ASLR) make exploitation of buffer-boundary violations far harder to turn into code execution.
Detects exploitation attempts that produce memory corruption, crashes, or anomalous behavior.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.
Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.
Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.
Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.
Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.
Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.