CVE-2009-0671
Vulnerability from cvelistv5

Format string vulnerability in the University of Washington (UW) c-client library, as used by the UW IMAP toolkit imap-2007d and other applications, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via format string specifiers in the initial request to the IMAP port (143/tcp). NOTE: Red Hat has disputed the vulnerability, stating "The Red Hat Security Response Team have been unable to confirm the existence of this format string vulnerability in the toolkit, and the sample published exploit is not complete or functional." CVE agrees that the exploit contains syntax errors and uses Unix-only include files while invoking Windows functions

Show details on NVD website


{
   containers: {
      cna: {
         providerMetadata: {
            dateUpdated: "2017-08-16T14:57:01",
            orgId: "8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca",
            shortName: "mitre",
         },
         rejectedReasons: [
            {
               lang: "en",
               value: "Format string vulnerability in the University of Washington (UW) c-client library, as used by the UW IMAP toolkit imap-2007d and other applications, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via format string specifiers in the initial request to the IMAP port (143/tcp).  NOTE: Red Hat has disputed the vulnerability, stating \"The Red Hat Security Response Team have been unable to confirm the existence of this format string vulnerability in the toolkit, and the sample published exploit is not complete or functional.\"  CVE agrees that the exploit contains syntax errors and uses Unix-only include files while invoking Windows functions",
            },
         ],
      },
   },
   cveMetadata: {
      assignerOrgId: "8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca",
      assignerShortName: "mitre",
      cveId: "CVE-2009-0671",
      datePublished: "2009-02-22T22:00:00",
      dateRejected: "2017-08-16T14:57:01",
      dateReserved: "2009-02-22T00:00:00",
      dateUpdated: "2017-08-16T14:57:01",
      state: "REJECTED",
   },
   dataType: "CVE_RECORD",
   dataVersion: "5.0",
   "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
      nvd: "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2009-0671\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"cve@mitre.org\",\"published\":\"2009-02-22T22:30:00.860\",\"lastModified\":\"2023-11-07T02:03:41.740\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Rejected\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"Rejected reason: Format string vulnerability in the University of Washington (UW) c-client library, as used by the UW IMAP toolkit imap-2007d and other applications, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via format string specifiers in the initial request to the IMAP port (143/tcp).  NOTE: Red Hat has disputed the vulnerability, stating \\\"The Red Hat Security Response Team have been unable to confirm the existence of this format string vulnerability in the toolkit, and the sample published exploit is not complete or functional.\\\"  CVE agrees that the exploit contains syntax errors and uses Unix-only include files while invoking Windows functions\"}],\"vendorComments\":[{\"organization\":\"Red Hat\",\"comment\":\"Disputed: The Red Hat Security Response Team have been unable to confirm the existence of this format string vulnerability in the toolkit, and the sample published exploit is not complete or functional.\",\"lastModified\":\"2009-02-24T00:00:00\"}],\"metrics\":{},\"references\":[]}}",
   },
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.

Security Advisory comment format.

This schema specifies the format of a comment related to a security advisory.

UUIDv4 of the comment
UUIDv4 of the Vulnerability-Lookup instance
When the comment was created originally
When the comment was last updated
Title of the comment
Description of the comment
The identifier of the vulnerability (CVE ID, GHSA-ID, PYSEC ID, etc.).



Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.