CVE-1999-0244
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedLivingston RADIUS code has a buffer overflow which can allow remote execution of commands as root.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceLivingston RADIUS server contains a buffer overflow vulnerability that allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code with root privileges. The vulnerability is exploitable over the network without authentication, making it highly dangerous.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 1.xCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if Livingston RADIUS server is installedCheck for the presence of Livingston RADIUS binaries or service by looking for 'radiusd', 'livradius', or related process names using commands like 'ps aux | grep radius' or checking installation directories such as /usr/local/radius, /etc/radiusclient, or /usr/sbin/radiusdAffected if Livingston RADIUS server process or binary is found on the system
-
Determine the installed versionRun 'radiusd -v' or 'radiusd -version' if available, check RPM/debian package version with 'rpm -q radiusd-liv' or 'dpkg -l | grep livingston', or examine version files in the installation directoryAffected if The version is 1.x (any minor version within the 1.x branch)
-
Verify the RADIUS service is listening on the networkCheck for open UDP ports 1812 and 1813 (or older ports 1645/1646) using 'netstat -ulnp' or 'ss -ulnp', and verify the bind address in the configuration file (typically radiusd.conf) to confirm it is listening on external interfaces rather than localhost onlyAffected if The service is bound to 0.0.0.0 or a public IP address and accepting connections from the network
-
Confirm authentication is not restrictedReview the RADIUS configuration files (clients.conf or dictionary files) to verify there is no IP-based access control or shared secret requirement preventing unauthorized accessAffected if The server accepts requests from any client or from untrusted networks without strict access controls
The system is affected if Livingston RADIUS version 1.x is installed, running, and exposed to the network without proper access controls.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade or patch the Livingston RADIUS implementation, or migrate to a supported modern RADIUS server (such as FreeRADIUS). If the old system cannot be replaced immediately, restrict network access to the RADIUS service using firewalls or ACLs.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-1999-0244 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-1999-0244 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data