CVE-2000-0794
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 IRIX libgl.so library allows local users to gain root privileges via a long HOME variable to programs such as (1) gmemusage and (2) gr_osview.
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 · high confidenceBuffer overflow in IRIX libgl.so library allows local users to execute arbitrary code with root privileges by providing an overly long HOME environment variable to setuid binaries gmemusage and gr_osview.
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= 6.2CVSS 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.
-
Verify the operating system is SGI IRIXRun 'uname -s' or check /etc/os-release if available to confirm the OS is IRIXAffected if The system is not running SGI IRIX, then this CVE does not apply
-
Confirm IRIX version is 6.2Run 'uname -r' or 'cat /etc/irix' to get the exact version numberAffected if The installed version is IRIX 6.2, proceed to next checks; if a different version, it may not be affected by this specific CVE
-
Check if gmemusage binary existsRun 'ls -la /usr/bin/gmemusage' or 'which gmemusage' to locate the binaryAffected if The binary exists and is setuid root, the system is vulnerable if the attacker can provide a long HOME environment variable
-
Check if gr_osview binary existsRun 'ls -la /usr/bin/gr_osview' or 'which gr_osview' to locate the binaryAffected if The binary exists and is setuid root, the system is vulnerable if the attacker can provide a long HOME environment variable
-
Verify setuid permissions on affected binariesRun 'ls -la /usr/bin/gmemusage /usr/bin/gr_osview' and check for 's' in the owner permissions column indicating setuidAffected if Either binary is setuid root, a local user could exploit the buffer overflow in libgl.so via a long HOME environment variable to gain root privileges
A defender is affected if their system runs SGI IRIX version 6.2 and has the gmemusage or gr_osview binaries present with setuid root permissions, allowing a local user to exploit the libgl.so buffer overflow via a crafted HOME environment variable.
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 dataRestrict execution permissions on gmemusage and gr_osview to trusted local users only; if vendor patches exist for IRIX, apply them. Consider replacing legacy IRIX systems given their end-of-life status.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,744.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2000-0794 — 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-2000-0794 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