CVE-2000-0506
published 2000-06-09CVE-2000-0506: The "capabilities" feature in Linux before 2.2.16 allows local users to cause a denial of service or gain privileges by setting the capabilities to prevent a…
PriorityP337critical10CVSS 2.0
AVNACLAuNCCICAC
EXPLOIT
EPSS
11.40%
95.5th percentile
The "capabilities" feature in Linux before 2.2.16 allows local users to cause a denial of service or gain privileges by setting the capabilities to prevent a setuid program from dropping privileges, aka the "Linux kernel setuid/setcap vulnerability."
Affected
17 ranges
| Vendor | Product | Version range | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
| linux | linux_kernel | — | — |
CVSS provenance
nvdv2.010.0CRITICALAV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
vendor_redhat10.0CRITICAL
CVEs like this are exactly what “Exploited This Week” covers.
Every Monday: what got weaponized or added to CISA KEV in the last seven days — each CVE cross-linked to its PoC, Nuclei template, and detection rule. Free, one email a week, unsubscribe in one click.
GHSA
GHSA-hp2c-p3rm-92wr: The "capabilities" feature in Linux before 2
ghsa_unreviewed·2022-05-03
CVE-2000-0506 [HIGH] GHSA-hp2c-p3rm-92wr: The "capabilities" feature in Linux before 2
The "capabilities" feature in Linux before 2.2.16 allows local users to cause a denial of service or gain privileges by setting the capabilities to prevent a setuid program from dropping privileges, aka the "Linux kernel setuid/setcap vulnerability."
Red Hat
security flaw
vendor_redhat·2000-06-09·CVSS 10.0
CVE-2000-0506 [CRITICAL] security flaw
security flaw
The "capabilities" feature in Linux before 2.2.16 allows local users to cause a denial of service or gain privileges by setting the capabilities to prevent a setuid program from dropping privileges, aka the "Linux kernel setuid/setcap vulnerability."
Statement: This issue was fixed in the following products:
- Red Hat Linux 6.0 - RHSA-2000:037 (2000-06-20)
- Red Hat Linux 6.1 - RHSA-2000:037 (2000-06-20)
- Red Hat Linux 6.2 - RHSA-2000:037 (2000-06-20)
No detection rules found.
Exploit-DB
Linux Kernel 2.2.x 2.4.0-test1 (SGI ProPack 1.2/1.3) - Sendmail Capabilities Privilege Escalation(1)
exploitdb·2000-06-07
CVE-2000-0506 Linux Kernel 2.2.x 2.4.0-test1 (SGI ProPack 1.2/1.3) - Sendmail Capabilities Privilege Escalation(1)
Linux Kernel 2.2.x 2.4.0-test1 (SGI ProPack 1.2/1.3) - Sendmail Capabilities Privilege Escalation(1)
---
/*
source: https://www.securityfocus.com/bid/1322/info
POSIX "Capabilities" have recently been implemented in the Linux kernel. These "Capabilities" are an additional form of privilege control to enable more specific control over what priviliged processes can do. Capabilities are implemented as three (fairly large) bitfields, which each bit representing a specific action a privileged process can perform. By setting specific bits, the actions of priviliged processes can be controlled -- access can be granted for various functions only to the specific parts of a program that require them. It is a security measure. The problem is that capabilities are copied with fork() execs, meaning t
Exploit-DB
Linux Kernel 2.2.x 2.4.0-test1 (SGI ProPack 1.2/1.3) - Sendmail 8.10.1 Capabilities Privilege Escalation (2)
exploitdb·2000-06-07
CVE-2000-0506 Linux Kernel 2.2.x 2.4.0-test1 (SGI ProPack 1.2/1.3) - Sendmail 8.10.1 Capabilities Privilege Escalation (2)
Linux Kernel 2.2.x 2.4.0-test1 (SGI ProPack 1.2/1.3) - Sendmail 8.10.1 Capabilities Privilege Escalation (2)
---
#source: https://www.securityfocus.com/bid/1322/info
#
# POSIX "Capabilities" have recently been implemented in the Linux kernel. These "Capabilities" are an additional form of privilege control to enable more specific control over what priviliged processes can do. Capabilities are implemented as three (fairly large) bitfields, which each bit representing a specific action a privileged process can perform. By setting specific bits, the actions of priviliged processes can be controlled -- access can be granted for various functions only to the specific parts of a program that require them. It is a security measure. The problem is that capabilities are copied with fork() execs,
CWE
Improper Privilege Management
mitre_cwe
CWE-269 Improper Privilege Management
CWE-269: Improper Privilege Management
The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.
Modes of Introduction:
Phase: Architecture and Design
Phase: Implementation
Note: REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.
Phase: Operation
Common Consequences:
Scope: Access Control. Impact: Gain Privileges or Assume Identity.
Detection Methods:
Automated Static Analysis: Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and contro
CWE
Privilege Defined With Unsafe Actions
mitre_cwe·CVSS 5.0
[MEDIUM] CWE-267 Privilege Defined With Unsafe Actions
CWE-267: Privilege Defined With Unsafe Actions
A particular privilege, role, capability, or right can be used to perform unsafe actions that were not intended, even when it is assigned to the correct entity.
Modes of Introduction:
Phase: Architecture and Design
Phase: Implementation
Note: REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.
Phase: Operation
Common Consequences:
Scope: Access Control. Impact: Gain Privileges or Assume Identity. A user can access restricted functionality and/or sensitive information that may include administrative functionality and user accounts.
Potential Mitigations:
[Architecture and Design] Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the softwar
ftp://sgigate.sgi.com/security/20000802-01-Phttp://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/bugtraq/2000-06/0062.htmlhttp://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/bugtraq/2000-06/0063.htmlhttp://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2000-037.htmlhttp://www.securityfocus.com/bid/1322http://www.securityfocus.com/templates/archive.pike?list=1&msg=Pine.LNX.4.21.0006090852340.3475-300000%40alfa.elzabsoft.plftp://sgigate.sgi.com/security/20000802-01-Phttp://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/bugtraq/2000-06/0062.htmlhttp://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/bugtraq/2000-06/0063.htmlhttp://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2000-037.htmlhttp://www.securityfocus.com/bid/1322http://www.securityfocus.com/templates/archive.pike?list=1&msg=Pine.LNX.4.21.0006090852340.3475-300000%40alfa.elzabsoft.pl
2000-06-09
Published