CVE-1999-1435
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 libsocks5 library of Socks 5 (socks5) 1.0r5 allows local users to gain privileges via long environmental variables.
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 in the libsocks5 library of Socks 5 version 1.0r5 allows local users to gain privileges by supplying overly long environmental variables, which overflow a buffer during processing.
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= 1.0r5CVSS 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 if Nec Socks 5 1.0r5 is installedSearch for socks5 binaries, libraries, or daemon processes on the system. Common locations include /usr/local/sbin/socks5, /usr/sbin/socks5, or check running processes for 'socks5' or 'socks5d'. Use commands like: which socks5, ps aux | grep socks5, find /usr -name '*socks5*' 2>/dev/nullAffected if Nec Socks 5 version 1.0r5 binaries or daemon processes are found on the system
-
Locate the libsocks5 librarySearch for libsocks5 library files. Check common library paths such as /usr/lib, /usr/local/lib, or /lib. Use: find / -name 'libsocks5*' 2>/dev/null or locate libsocks5Affected if The libsocks5 library file exists on the system, indicating the vulnerable library is present
-
Verify the socks5 daemon is runningCheck for running socks5 services. Use: ps aux | grep -i socks or netstat -anp | grep -i sock (looking for port 1080, the standard SOCKS port)Affected if A socks5 daemon process is actively running, enabling the vulnerable code to process environmental variables
-
Check for socks5 configuration filesLook for socks5 configuration files which indicate an active installation. Common paths: /etc/socks5.conf, /etc/socks/socks5.conf, /usr/local/etc/socks5.conf. Use: find /etc -name '*socks5*' 2>/dev/nullAffected if Socks 5 configuration files exist, confirming the software is installed and likely in use
The system is affected if Nec Socks 5 version 1.0r5 is installed and running, with the libsocks5 library present to process environmental variables that could overflow the vulnerable buffer.
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 from the obsolete socks5 1.0r5 to a current, supported SOCKS proxy implementation, or remove the software entirely if unnecessary, as this is a 1999-era vulnerability in discontinued software.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-1999-1435 — 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-1999-1435 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