CVE-2000-0437
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 the CyberPatrol daemon "cyberdaemon" used in gauntlet and WebShield allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service or 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 confidenceBuffer overflow vulnerability in CyberPatrol's 'cyberdaemon' service used in Gauntlet firewall and WebShield appliances. The overflow occurs in the daemon process handling network requests, allowing remote attackers to overwrite stack memory and execute arbitrary commands or cause denial of service.
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= 4.1= 4.2= 5.0= 5.5= 4.0= 100.0= 300.0CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Identify Gauntlet Firewall installationLocate Gauntlet Firewall installation directories or check system services for 'Gauntlet' or 'cyberdaemon' processes. Common paths may include /usr/local/gauntlet or installation directories under Network Associates.Affected if Gauntlet Firewall version 4.1, 4.2, 5.0, or 5.5 is installed
-
Identify Webshield installationLocate Webshield installation directories or check system services for 'WebShield' or 'cyberdaemon' processes.Affected if Webshield version 4.0 or Webshield E Ppliance version 100.0 or 300.0 is installed
-
Verify cyberdaemon service is runningCheck running processes for 'cyberdaemon' using commands like 'ps -ef' or service status queries. This daemon handles network requests for CyberPatrol filtering.Affected if The cyberdaemon process is active and handling network requests
-
Confirm version matches affected rangesCompare installed product version against the affected ranges: Gauntlet Firewall 4.1, 4.2, 5.0, 5.5; Webshield 4.0; Webshield E Ppliance 100.0, 300.0. Use product-specific version reporting commands or check installation metadata.Affected if Installed version exactly matches one of the listed affected versions
A system is affected if it runs Gauntlet Firewall 4.1-5.5, Webshield 4.0, or Webshield E Ppliance 100.0/300.0 with the cyberdaemon service active and handling network requests.
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 is a 25+ year old vulnerability in legacy security appliances. If affected systems are still operational, they should be immediately isolated from networks and replaced with current security solutions, as patches for 2000-era software are unlikely to exist or be applicable.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing16.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $15,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2000-0437 — 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-2000-0437 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