CVE-1999-0334
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 · uneditedIn Solaris 2.2 and 2.3, when fsck fails on startup, it allows a local user with physical access to obtain root access.
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 confidenceIn Solaris 2.2 and 2.3, when the fsck (file system check) utility fails during system startup, it can drop the system into a state that allows a local user with physical access to gain root privileges.
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 versions= 5.0CVSS 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.
-
Identify the operating system nameRun 'uname -a' or check /etc/release to determine if the system is SunOS or SolarisAffected if If the output shows anything other than SunOS or Solaris, this CVE does not apply
-
Determine the exact OS versionRun 'uname -r' to get the release version, or check /etc/os release files if availableAffected if If the version corresponds to Solaris 2.2 (5.2), 2.3 (5.3), or SunOS 5.0, the system falls within the affected version range
-
Verify SunOS version numberRun 'uname -v' to display the version number of the kernelAffected if If the version shows as 5.0, 5.2, or 5.3, these correspond to SunOS 5.0 (Solaris 2.0), Solaris 2.2, and Solaris 2.3 respectively, which are affected
-
Check if fsck runs at system startupReview startup scripts in /etc/rc*.d/ or check /etc/fsck configuration to see if fsck is executed during bootAffected if If fsck is configured to run automatically at startup, the vulnerability condition could apply when fsck fails
-
Assess physical access exposureEvaluate whether the system is in a secured location where unauthorized physical access is possibleAffected if Physical access is required to exploit this flaw, so if the system is in a locked data center with restricted access, the practical risk is reduced even on affected versions
A system is affected only if it is running SunOS 5.0, Solaris 2.2, or Solaris 2.3, has fsck configured to run at startup, and could be accessed by a user with physical console access.
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 dataThis vulnerability affects extremely old, unsupported Solaris versions (2.2/2.3) from the 1990s. The primary remediation is to migrate to a supported operating system version, as these legacy systems are no longer patched. If continued operation is absolutely required, isolate the systems physically and limit access strictly.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,744.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-1999-0334 — 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-1999-0334 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