CVE-1999-0696
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 · uneditedBuffer overflow in CDE Calendar Manager Service Daemon (rpc.cmsd).
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 confidenceBuffer overflow vulnerability in the CDE Calendar Manager Service Daemon (rpc.cmsd), a network service that was commonly enabled on Unix systems running the Common Desktop Environment. The overflow allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code with elevated 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 data= 10.24= 11.00= 2.5= 2.6= 4.1.3= 5.3= 5.4= 5.5= 5.5.1CVSS 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
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/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.
-
Check if rpc.cmsd service is runningRun 'rpcinfo -p' to list registered RPC services, or 'ps -ef | grep cmsd' to check if the Calendar Manager Service Daemon process is activeAffected if The rpc.cmsd daemon (program number 100068) is listening on RPC ports
-
Confirm operating system versionRun 'uname -a' or 'uname -r' to display the exact OS versionAffected if Running HP-UX 10.24 or 11.00, Solaris 2.5 or 2.6, or SunOS 4.1.3, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, or 5.5.1
-
Verify CDE installationCheck for CDE directories such as /usr/dt, or use 'ls /usr/dt/bin/rpc.cmsd' to locate the cmsd binaryAffected if CDE is installed and the rpc.cmsd binary exists on the system
System is affected if running one of the listed OS versions with CDE installed and the rpc.cmsd daemon enabled and exposed to the network
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.
dbcve · scopedDisable the rpc.cmsd service if not required, or apply vendor-provided patches for affected CDE installations; restrict network access to this service via firewall rules if it must remain enabled.
Migrate to currently supported OS versions (Solaris 11+, HP-UX 11iV4+, or Linux distributions) - no direct upgrade path from these legacy versions exists
- These affected operating system versions (HP-UX 10.24, 11.00; Solaris 2.5, 2.6; SunOS 4.1.3, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5) are extremely legacy and have been end-of-life for over two decades.
- No modern patches or upgrades are available from vendors for these specific OS versions.
- The CDE Calendar Manager Service Daemon (rpc.cmsd) should be disabled or firewall-blocked on any remaining legacy systems.
- Migrate to currently supported operating system versions (e.g., modern Solaris 11, HP-UX 11iV4, or Linux distributions with active support).
- If the legacy system must remain in service, isolate it in a restricted network segment with no external access and disable the rpc.cmsd service.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,760.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-1999-0696 — 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-1999-0696 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