CVE-1999-0249
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 · uneditedWindows NT RSHSVC program allows remote users to execute arbitrary commands.
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 · moderate confidenceThe Remote Shell Service (RSHSVC) on Windows NT contains a vulnerability that allows remote unauthenticated users to execute arbitrary commands on the affected system. This is a remote code execution vulnerability in a legacy Windows NT service that listens for remote shell connections.
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 dataall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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.
-
Confirm the operating system versionRun 'winmsd' or check System Properties to verify if the system is Windows NT (any version) or Windows 2000 (any version).Affected if The system is running Windows NT or Windows 2000.
-
Check if the RSHSVC service existsOpen Services management console (services.msc) or run 'sc query rshsvc' from command prompt to query for the Remote Shell Service.Affected if The RSHSVC service is found on the system.
-
Determine if RSHSVC is runningIn Services console, check the Status column for RSHSVC, or run 'sc query rshsvc' to see if the service state is RUNNING.Affected if The RSHSVC service is installed and currently running.
-
Identify the listening portRun 'netstat -an | findstr 514' or use a port scanner to check if port 514/TCP is open and listening. RSHSVC typically listens on this port.Affected if Port 514/TCP is open and accepting connections.
-
Assess network exposureCheck firewall rules or IP restrictions to determine if the RSHSVC port is accessible from network segments beyond localhost.Affected if The RSHSVC port is accessible from remote hosts.
A system is affected if it runs Windows NT or Windows 2000 with the RSHSVC service installed, running, and listening on an accessible network port.
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 dataDisable or remove the RSHSVC service if not required; if the service is needed, implement network-level access controls to restrict which hosts can reach the service port, and migrate from Windows NT to a supported operating system.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-1999-0249 — 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-1999-0249 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