CVE-2013-3525 in Request Tracker
Summary
by MITRE
** DISPUTED ** SQL injection vulnerability in Approvals/ in Request Tracker (RT) 4.0.10 and earlier allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the ShowPending parameter. NOTE: the vendor disputes this issue, stating "We were unable to replicate it, and the individual that reported it retracted their report," and "we had verified that the claimed exploit did not function according to the author s claims."
If you want to get best quality of vulnerability data, you may have to visit VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 02/05/2025
The vulnerability identified as CVE-2013-3525 pertains to a potential SQL injection flaw within the Request Tracker (RT) application version 4.0.10 and earlier. This issue specifically affects the Approvals component of RT, where the ShowPending parameter appears to be susceptible to malicious input manipulation. The reported vulnerability would allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands, potentially leading to unauthorized database access and data manipulation. This type of vulnerability falls under the category of CWE-89 SQL Injection as defined by the Common Weakness Enumeration catalog, which represents one of the most critical web application security flaws due to its potential for data breach and system compromise.
The technical nature of this vulnerability stems from inadequate input validation within the Approvals module of RT. When the ShowPending parameter is processed, it appears that user-supplied input is not properly sanitized or escaped before being incorporated into SQL query construction. This allows attackers to inject malicious SQL fragments that can alter the intended query behavior, potentially extracting sensitive information, modifying database records, or even gaining administrative access to the underlying database system. The vulnerability's remote exploitability means that attackers do not require local system access or authentication to attempt exploitation, making it particularly dangerous for publicly accessible web applications.
The operational impact of this vulnerability, if confirmed, would be severe for organizations utilizing RT 4.0.10 or earlier versions. Database compromise could result in exposure of sensitive approval workflows, user credentials, and business-critical data stored within the RT system. The potential for privilege escalation and unauthorized access to the database infrastructure could lead to complete system compromise. According to ATT&CK framework, this vulnerability would map to techniques such as T1071.004 Application Layer Protocol: Structured Query Language and T1566.001 Phishing: Spearphishing Attachment, as it represents a critical entry point for attackers seeking to establish persistent access to organizational systems. Organizations using RT in production environments would face significant risk of data breaches and regulatory compliance violations.
However, the vendor's official stance on this vulnerability is crucial for understanding its actual threat level. The vendor has explicitly disputed the validity of this issue, citing their inability to replicate the reported exploit and the withdrawal of the original report by the reporter. This vendor verification process is essential in the vulnerability assessment lifecycle, as it helps distinguish between legitimate security concerns and false positives or misreported issues. The vendor's verification process, which included confirming that the claimed exploit did not function according to the author's claims, suggests that either the vulnerability was not properly understood or that the specific conditions required for exploitation may not exist in the reported environment. This vendor dispute highlights the importance of proper validation and reproduction of security issues before assigning risk scores or implementing mitigation strategies. Organizations should consider this vendor validation when assessing their risk posture and should prioritize other known vulnerabilities in their RT installations while ensuring proper patch management practices are maintained to address confirmed security issues. The vendor's statement regarding the retraction of the original report further underscores the need for thorough verification of security reports and the importance of maintaining accurate vulnerability databases that reflect the actual threat landscape rather than unverified claims.