CVE-2011-3389

MEDIUMCVSS v2 · 4.34.3
EchelonGraph scoreLOW confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS v2 base score.

This CVE was only ever scored under CVSS v2.0. NVD CVSS v2.0 base 4.3 — NVD rates that MEDIUM (NVD's v2 bands: LOW 0.0–3.9 / MEDIUM 4.0–6.9 / HIGH 7.0–10.0; no CRITICAL band). Vector AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N. CVSS v2 is an older, coarser metric than v3.1/v4.0 (no Scope, no User Interaction, no Attack Requirements), so it is not directly comparable to a v3 or v4 score. NVD has never re-scored this record under v3. EPSS predicts 73% exploitation probability in the next 30 days; it does not lift the v2 base. EPSS sets EG Risk's exploitation input. Confidence: LOW.

Triggered by: NVD CVSS v2.0 (legacy fallback)
Sources: NVD CVSS v2.0
Trending — 5 sources updated this weekWeaponized

Also known asEUVD-2011-3352 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-rhch-pcq2-7gp3 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

4.3EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High exploitation likelihood — EPSS 73%
  • Public exploit code is available (Metasploit, other public proof-of-concept code)
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 73%CVSS v2: 4.3Exploit: Metasploit · other public PoCExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

The SSL protocol, as used in certain configurations in Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, Opera, and other products, encrypts data by using CBC mode with chained initialization vectors, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to obtain plaintext HTTP headers via a blockwise chosen-boundary attack (BCBA) on an HTTPS session, in conjunction with JavaScript code that uses (1) the HTML5 WebSocket API, (2) the Java URLConnection API, or (3) the Silverlight WebClient API, aka a "BEAST" attack.

CVSS v2.0 (legacy)
4.3MEDIUMNVD never assigned a CVSS v3 rating to this CVE
EG Score
4.3MEDIUMlow confidence
EG Risk
49
EG Risk 49/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity43% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 4.3 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation73% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at every mission impact level.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
73%
EPSS %ILE
99th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (4.3): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 4.3 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
4.3 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.NVD CVSS v2.0 · CVSS v2.0AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
EG Likelihood
73% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-28). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

September 6, 2011

Last Modified

October 9, 2026

References (89)

15 of 89 shown · show the other 74

Patch Availability(8)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
ubuntuopenjdk-6-jre-lib (6b23~pre11-0ubuntu1.11.10) @ oneiric2026-10-29ubuntu
redhatjava-1.6.0-ibm-1:1.6.0.14.0-1jpp.1.el5_92013-10-23redhat
redhatjava-1.5.0-ibm-1:1.5.0.13.1-1jpp.2.el6_22012-04-23redhat
redhatjava-1.4.2-ibm-sap-0:1.4.2.13.11.sap-1jpp.1.el52012-02-29redhat
redhatjava-1.6.0-ibm-1:1.6.0.10.0-1jpp.2.el52012-01-18redhat
redhatjava-1.4.2-ibm-0:1.4.2.13.11-1jpp.1.el52012-01-09redhat
redhatjava-1.6.0-sun-1:1.6.0.29-1jpp.1.el52011-10-19redhat
redhatjava-1.6.0-openjdk-1:1.6.0.0-1.40.1.9.10.el6_12011-10-18redhat

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(42 across 6 ecosystems)
Debian:11(10)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
asterisk—
  • every version up to 1:13.7.2~dfsg-1: fixed in 1:13.7.2~dfsg-1
—
bouncycastle—
  • every version up to 1.49+dfsg-1: fixed in 1.49+dfsg-1
—
curl—
  • every version up to 7.24.0-1: fixed in 7.24.0-1
—
erlang—
  • every version up to 1:15.b-dfsg-1: fixed in 1:15.b-dfsg-1
—
gnutls283.7.1-5 ... 3.8.9-3 (71 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
haskell-tls1.5.4-1 ... 2.1.8-2 (6 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
lighttpd—
  • every version up to 1.4.30-1: fixed in 1.4.30-1
—
nss—
  • every version up to 3.13.1.with.ckbi.1.88-1: fixed in 3.13.1.with.ckbi.1.88-1
—
pound—
  • every version up to 2.6-2: fixed in 2.6-2
—
python2.7—
  • every version up to 2.7.3~rc1-1: fixed in 2.7.3~rc1-1
—
Debian:14(9)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
asterisk0.1.11-3 ... 1:13.1.0~dfsg-1.1 (192 versions)
  • every version up to 1:13.7.2~dfsg-1: fixed in 1:13.7.2~dfsg-1
—
bouncycastle—
  • every version up to 1.49+dfsg-1: fixed in 1.49+dfsg-1
—
curl—
  • every version up to 7.24.0-1: fixed in 7.24.0-1
—
erlang—
  • every version up to 1:15.b-dfsg-1: fixed in 1:15.b-dfsg-1
—
gnutls283.8.10-1 ... 3.8.9-3 (12 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
haskell-tls1.8.0-1, 2.1.8-1, 2.1.8-2
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
lighttpd—
  • every version up to 1.4.30-1: fixed in 1.4.30-1
—
nss—
  • every version up to 3.13.1.with.ckbi.1.88-1: fixed in 3.13.1.with.ckbi.1.88-1
—
pound—
  • every version up to 2.6-2: fixed in 2.6-2
—
Debian:13(8)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
bouncycastle—
  • every version up to 1.49+dfsg-1: fixed in 1.49+dfsg-1
—
curl—
  • every version up to 7.24.0-1: fixed in 7.24.0-1
—
erlang—
  • every version up to 1:15.b-dfsg-1: fixed in 1:15.b-dfsg-1
—
gnutls283.8.10-1 ... 3.8.9-3+deb13u4 (16 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
haskell-tls1.8.0-1, 2.1.8-1, 2.1.8-2
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
lighttpd—
  • every version up to 1.4.30-1: fixed in 1.4.30-1
—
nss—
  • every version up to 3.13.1.with.ckbi.1.88-1: fixed in 3.13.1.with.ckbi.1.88-1
—
pound—
  • every version up to 2.6-2: fixed in 2.6-2
—
Debian:12(7)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
bouncycastle—
  • every version up to 1.49+dfsg-1: fixed in 1.49+dfsg-1
—
curl—
  • every version up to 7.24.0-1: fixed in 7.24.0-1
—
erlang—
  • every version up to 1:15.b-dfsg-1: fixed in 1:15.b-dfsg-1
—
gnutls283.7.9-2 ... 3.8.9-3 (45 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
haskell-tls1.5.8-1, 1.6.0-1, 1.8.0-1, 2.1.8-1, 2.1.8-2
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
lighttpd—
  • every version up to 1.4.30-1: fixed in 1.4.30-1
—
nss—
  • every version up to 3.13.1.with.ckbi.1.88-1: fixed in 3.13.1.with.ckbi.1.88-1
—
Debian:6.0(5)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
curl7.21.0-1, 7.21.0-2
  • every version up to 7.21.0-2.1+squeeze1: fixed in 7.21.0-2.1+squeeze1
—
lighttpd1.4.28-2
  • every version up to 1.4.28-2+squeeze1: fixed in 1.4.28-2+squeeze1
—
nss3.12.8-1 ... 3.12.8-1+squeeze9 (14 versions)
  • every version up to 3.12.8-1+squeeze11: fixed in 3.12.8-1+squeeze11
—
openjdk-66b18-1.8.10-0+squeeze1 ... 6b18-1.8.9-0.1~squeeze1 (16 versions)
  • every version up to 6b18-1.8.10-0+squeeze2: fixed in 6b18-1.8.10-0+squeeze2
—
pound2.5-1, 2.5-1.1, 2.6-1
  • every version up to 2.6-1+deb6u1: fixed in 2.6-1+deb6u1
—
Debian:5.0(3)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
curl7.18.2-8, 7.18.2-8lenny2, 7.18.2-8lenny3, 7.18.2-8lenny4, 7.18.2-8lenny5
  • every version up to 7.18.2-8lenny6: fixed in 7.18.2-8lenny6
—
lighttpd1.4.19-5, 1.4.19-5+lenny1, 1.4.19-5+lenny2
  • every version up to 1.4.19-5+lenny3: fixed in 1.4.19-5+lenny3
—
openjdk-66b11-9.1 ... 6b18~pre4-1 (58 versions)
  • every version up to 6b18-1.8.10-0~lenny2: fixed in 6b18-1.8.10-0~lenny2
—

Weakness Classification(2)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Additional Vendor Advisories

(1)

Vendors that published advisories for this CVE beyond the curated set above. Broader coverage but minimal per-row detail — click through for the original advisory.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 8× in last 7d / 30× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 86 of 120 refreshes on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 14 repeat rows among the latest 100 are merged into the row they repeat. The 34 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-10-31 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  2. 2026-10-29 14:23 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-29 14:23 UTCVendor advisory
  4. 2026-10-29 14:23 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rhch-pcq2-7gp3
  5. 2026-10-28 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  6. 2026-10-27 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  7. 2026-10-27 06:25 UTCOSV refresh
  8. 2026-10-26 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  9. 2026-10-25 20:15 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-25 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  11. 2026-10-21 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  12. 2026-10-20 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  13. 2026-10-18 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  14. 2026-10-18 11:31 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-16 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  16. 2026-10-14 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  17. 2026-10-13 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  18. 2026-10-12 21:35 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-10-12 01:41 UTCEG score recompute
  20. 2026-10-11 13:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  21. 2026-10-10 19:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  22. 2026-10-09 20:34 UTCVendor advisory
  23. 2026-10-09 20:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rhch-pcq2-7gp3
  24. 2026-10-09 20:33 UTCNVD update
  25. 2026-10-09 19:19 UTCEG score recompute
Show 61 more
  1. 2026-10-09 19:19 UTCVendor advisory
  2. 2026-10-09 19:19 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rhch-pcq2-7gp3
  3. 2026-10-09 19:18 UTCMITRE cvelistV5
  4. 2026-10-07 23:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  5. 2026-10-06 15:10 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  6. 2026-10-01 00:10 UTCOSV refresh
  7. 2026-09-30 14:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  8. 2026-09-29 08:21 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-09-26 15:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  10. 2026-09-24 13:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  11. 2026-09-16 13:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  12. 2026-09-15 03:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  13. 2026-09-13 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  14. 2026-09-12 14:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  15. 2026-09-12 04:23 UTCOSV refresh
  16. 2026-09-06 13:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  17. 2026-09-05 15:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  18. 2026-09-04 13:55 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  19. 2026-08-24 10:03 UTCOSV refresh
  20. 2026-08-19 16:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  21. 2026-08-15 01:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  22. 2026-08-08 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  23. 2026-08-08 06:26 UTCOSV refresh
  24. 2026-08-05 19:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  25. 2026-07-26 13:43 UTCEG score recomputeAssessed again: 4.3 MEDIUM
  26. 2026-07-23 14:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  27. 2026-07-23 01:05 UTCEG score recompute▼ 7.10
  28. 2026-07-23 00:09 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 7.1 HIGH
  29. 2026-07-22 23:45 UTCOSV refresh
  30. 2026-07-22 21:48 UTCEG score recompute
  31. 2026-07-22 14:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  32. 2026-07-21 15:21 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  33. 2026-07-20 17:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  34. 2026-07-19 02:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  35. 2026-07-18 10:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  36. 2026-07-16 16:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  37. 2026-07-15 16:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  38. 2026-07-13 06:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  39. 2026-07-08 15:10 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  40. 2026-07-06 16:23 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  41. 2026-07-05 18:59 UTCOSV refresh
  42. 2026-07-05 02:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  43. 2026-07-01 15:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  44. 2026-06-30 23:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  45. 2026-06-29 14:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  46. 2026-06-25 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  47. 2026-06-23 21:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  48. 2026-06-17 17:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  49. 2026-06-17 06:05 UTCOSV refresh
  50. 2026-06-15 17:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  51. 2026-06-13 22:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.8% · 88th percentile
  52. 2026-06-12 23:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.8% · 88th percentile
  53. 2026-06-11 13:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.8% · 88th percentile
  54. 2026-06-10 22:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.8% · 88th percentile
  55. 2026-06-10 13:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.8% · 88th percentile
  56. 2026-06-07 15:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.8% · 88th percentile
  57. 2026-06-06 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.8% · 88th percentile
  58. 2026-06-05 22:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.8% · 88th percentile
  59. 2026-06-05 06:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.8% · 88th percentile
  60. 2026-06-04 13:09 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.8% · 88th percentile
  61. 2026-06-02 20:10 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.8% · 88th percentile

Publicly available exploits

(2 references)

Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (1 Metasploit module, 1 GitHub PoC). Defenders should treat patch urgency accordingly.

  • Metasploitauxiliary/scanner/ssl/ssl_version✓ verified
    Published Oct 17, 2014

    SSL/TLS Version Detection

    Open source ↗
  • GitHub PoCmpgn/BEAST-PoC
    Published Mar 28, 2015

    :muscle: Proof Of Concept of the BEAST attack against SSL/TLS CVE-2011-3389 :muscle:

    Open source ↗

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2011-3389?
CVE-2011-3389 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on September 6, 2011. The SSL protocol, as used in certain configurations in Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, Opera, and other products, encrypts data by using CBC mode with chained initialization vectors, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to obtain plaintext HTTP…
When was CVE-2011-3389 made public?
CVE-2011-3389 was made public on May 11, 2004: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, MITRE Corporation, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on September 6, 2011. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 9, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2011-3389 actively exploited?
CVE-2011-3389 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. EchelonGraph's EG-KEV model places it in Tier 2 (Weaponized), which is not evidence of exploitation: a Metasploit module exists for it. EchelonGraph does not test whether exploit code works. FIRST EPSS estimates a 73% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (99th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
How do I remediate CVE-2011-3389?
A fix for CVE-2011-3389 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2011-3389 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2011-3389

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2011-3389?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.