LinuxOperating system · Redhat
CVE-2000-1213
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 · uneditedping in iputils before 20001010, as distributed on Red Hat Linux 6.2 through 7J and other operating systems, does not drop privileges after acquiring a raw socket, which increases ping's exposure to bugs that otherwise would occur at lower privileges.
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 ping utility in iputils versions prior to 20001010 fails to drop root privileges after acquiring a raw socket, leaving the process running with elevated privileges unnecessarily. This design flaw increases the attack surface by exposing any security vulnerabilities in ping's code to be exploitable at full root privilege level rather than at a lower unprivileged level.
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
LinuxOperating system
= 6.2= 7.0= 6.2<= 2000-10-10CVSS 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.
-
Verify iputils package installationRun 'rpm -q iputils' on Red Hat-based systems or check for the presence of /bin/pingAffected if iputils package is installed and no vendor updates have been applied
-
Retrieve installed iputils versionRun 'rpm -q iputils' to display the installed version string, or run 'ping -V' if availableAffected if Version is earlier than 20001010, or matches Red Hat 6.2/7.0 (rh6.2/rh70) or Immunix 6.2
-
Confirm ping binary ownership and permissionsRun 'ls -l /bin/ping' or 'ls -l /usr/sbin/ping' to check ownership (should be root) and permissions (should include setuid bit)Affected if ping binary has the setuid bit set and is owned by root, indicating it runs with elevated privileges
-
Test effective privilege level at runtimeExecute 'ping -c 1 127.0.0.1' and observe the effective UID (euid) or run 'id' in a subshell to check if ping retains root privileges longer than necessaryAffected if ping continues to run with root effective UID after raw socket initialization instead of dropping to an unprivileged user
A system is affected if iputils version is earlier than 20001010 (or matches the specific Red Hat/Immunix versions listed) and the ping binary retains root privileges after socket creation.
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 iputils to version 20001010 or later which properly drops privileges after raw socket creation, or apply vendor-specific security patches for affected Red Hat Linux 6.2-7J systems.
Fix this in Linux
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2000-1213 — 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-2000-1213 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