CVE-2000-0587
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 · uneditedThe privpath directive in glftpd 1.18 allows remote attackers to bypass access restrictions for directories by using the file name completion capability.
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 confidenceglftpd 1.18 implements a privpath directive to restrict access to specific directories. However, the file name completion (tab-completion) feature in the FTP client can be exploited to bypass these access restrictions, allowing attackers to navigate to restricted directories they should not have permission to access.
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= 1.18= 1.19= 1.20= 1.21b1= 1.21b2= 1.21b3= 1.21b4= 1.21b5= 1.21b6= 1.21b7= 1.21b8CVSS 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 if glftpd is runningCheck running processes for glftpd: `ps aux | grep -i glftpd` or check open ports on common FTP ports (21, 20, 7000-7100) that may be running glftpdAffected if glftpd process is found running on the system
-
Determine glftpd versionCheck the glftpd binary version: `glftpd -v` or look in the glftpd.conf for a version string, or check the binary file for version information using `strings` or `file`Affected if version matches 1.18, 1.19, 1.20, or 1.21b1 through 1.21b8
-
Check if privpath directive is configuredExamine the glftpd configuration file (commonly /etc/glftpd.conf or /glftpd/etc/glftpd.conf) for lines starting with `privpath` which restrict access to specific directoriesAffected if privpath directives are present, limiting access to certain directories
-
Verify FTP access is availableConfirm that FTP service is accessible and accepts connections, allowing tab-completion interactionAffected if FTP service is exposed and accepting connections from users who should be restricted by privpath
You are affected if glftpd version 1.18 through 1.21b8 is running with privpath directives configured and FTP access is available, as tab-completion can bypass the access restrictions.
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 glftpd to a patched version if available, or implement compensating controls such as network segmentation, IP-based restrictions, or disable the vulnerable file name completion feature if supported by the configuration.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2000-0587 — 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-2000-0587 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