CVE-2000-0839
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 · uneditedWinCOM LPD 1.00.90 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a large number of LPD options to the LPD port (515).
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 · low confidenceWinCOM LPD version 1.00.90 contains a denial of service vulnerability where remote attackers can send a large number of LPD (Line Printer Daemon) protocol options to port 515, causing the service to become unresponsive or crash. The vulnerability stems from improper handling of excessive or malformed LPD request options.
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= 1.00.90CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Verify WinCOM LPD installationCheck for WinCOM LPD service in Windows Services (services.msc) or check Program Files for WinCOM LPD directoryAffected if WinCOM LPD service or software is present on the system
-
Confirm installed versionRight-click the LPD executable in Program Files\WinCom or WinCom LPD folder, select Properties, then check the Version tab for build 1.00.90Affected if Version is exactly 1.00.90
-
Verify LPD service is runningOpen Command Prompt and run: netstat -an | findstr :515 to check if port 515 is listening, or check if WinCOM LPD service shows 'Started' in services.mscAffected if Port 515 is in LISTENING state and WinCOM LPD service is running
-
Assess network exposureCheck firewall rules or run: telnet <your-ip> 515 from an external system to confirm port 515 is accessible from networkAffected if Port 515 is open and accessible from untrusted network segments
System is affected if WinCOM LPD version 1.00.90 is installed, the service is running, and port 515 is exposed to network attackers.
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 dataAs WinCOM LPD 1.00.90 is extremely outdated software from 2000, the primary mitigation is to decommission or replace this legacy service with modern LPD implementations. If the software must remain in isolated environments, restrict network access to port 515 via firewall rules to prevent unauthorized remote attackers from exploiting this vulnerability.
- 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-2000-0839 — 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-2000-0839 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