CVE-2000-0803
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 · uneditedGNU Groff uses the current working directory to find a device description file, which allows a local user to gain additional privileges by including a malicious postpro directive in the description file, which is executed when another user runs groff.
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 confidenceGNU Groff insecurely searches the current working directory for device description files instead of using trusted system paths. A local attacker can place a malicious device description file containing a postpro directive that executes arbitrary commands when another user runs groff from that directory.
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< 1.17CVSS 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.
-
Determine groff versionRun `groff --version` or check via package manager (e.g., `dpkg -l groff`, `rpm -q groff`)Affected if Installed version is less than 1.17 (the vulnerability exists in all versions below this)
-
Identify groff device file search behaviorTest if groff searches current working directory for device files - run groff from a directory with a custom device file and observe which device is usedAffected if Groff finds device files in the current working directory before checking system paths
-
Check for risky working directoriesIdentify world-writable or group-writable directories where users commonly run groff (e.g., /tmp, /var/tmp, shared project directories)Affected if Users execute groff from world-writable or untrusted directories
-
Verify file access patternsReview file permissions on groff device directories (typically /usr/share/groff/*/dev) and ensure only privileged users can modify themAffected if Device description files in system paths are writable by non-root users
The system is affected if groff version is below 1.17 AND users can be enticed to run groff from directories containing malicious device description files.
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.
dbcve · scoped1.17
Avoid running groff from world-writable directories. Run groff from trusted directories only, and consider using absolute paths for device files.
groff >= 1.17
- Identify the groff package installed on the system using the package manager (e.g., dpkg -l | grep groff, rpm -qa | grep groff, or which groff)
- Upgrade groff to version 1.17 or later using the system's package manager (e.g., apt-get update && apt-get install groff, yum update groff, or dnf update groff)
- Verify the installed version using 'groff --version' to confirm it is >= 1.17
- Ensure that untrusted users cannot write to directories where groff will be run, as a defense-in-depth measure
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2000-0803 — 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-2000-0803 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