CVE-2000-0470
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 · uneditedAllegro RomPager HTTP server allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a malformed authentication request.
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 Allegro RomPager HTTP server contains a denial of service vulnerability that can be triggered by sending a malformed authentication request to the server. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send specially crafted HTTP requests to crash the server, rendering it unavailable.
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= 2.10CVSS 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
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 HTTP server bannerSend an HTTP request to the server (e.g., curl -I http://target) and examine the Server header in the response to determine if Allegro RomPager is in useAffected if The Server header reveals Allegro RomPager and no version is shown or shows version 2.10
-
Confirm RomPager version if displayedIf the Server header includes version information, record the full version string and compare it to 2.10Affected if The version string exactly matches 2.10
-
Identify device using RomPagerExamine the HTTP response headers, HTML content, or device documentation for indicators that the device runs RomPager (some embedded devices expose this in headers or admin interfaces)Affected if The device is confirmed to use Allegro RomPager version 2.10 as its HTTP server
-
Verify HTTP service is accessibleConfirm the HTTP service is listening on the network (e.g., using nmap, netstat, or curl to connect to the port)Affected if The service is exposed on the network, making it reachable for exploitation
You are affected if your system runs Allegro RomPager version 2.10 as an HTTP server and that service is network-accessible.
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 dataSince RomPager is legacy embedded software, the primary remediation is to replace or upgrade the affected device/firmware to a modern HTTP server solution. If continued use is required, implement network-level filtering to restrict access to the HTTP service to trusted sources only.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2000-0470 — 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-2000-0470 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