dbcve.org
LinuxOperating system · Redhat

CVE-2000-1220

HIGH · 10.0 CVSS v2.0 Published 2000-01-08
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
The line printer daemon (lpd) in the lpr package in multiple Linux operating systems allows local users to gain root privileges by causing sendmail to execute with arbitrary command line arguments, as demonstrated using the -C option to specify a configuration file.

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 confidence

Local privilege escalation vulnerability in the line printer daemon (lpd) from the lpr package. The daemon runs as root and allows local users to manipulate sendmail command-line arguments, specifically the -C option to specify an arbitrary configuration file, enabling execution with root privileges.

MitigationRemove or disable the vulnerable lpr/lpd package on modern systems; on legacy systems, restrict lpd access, remove setuid root permissions, or upgrade to modern printing systems like CUPS.

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
Affected:= 4.0= 4.1= 4.2= 5.0= 5.1= 5.2= 6.0= 6.1
IrixOperating system
Affected:= 6.5= 6.5.1= 6.5.2= 6.5.3= 6.5.4= 6.5.5= 6.5.6= 6.5.7= 6.5.8= 6.5.9= 6.5.10= 6.5.11

CVSS 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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Check if lpr or lpd package is installed
    On Red Hat systems: rpm -qa | grep -i lpr. On IRIX systems: versions -l lpr or swlist | grep -i lpr.
    Affected if The lpr or lpd package is present on the system.
  2. Verify the installed lpr/lpd version
    On Red Hat: rpm -q lpr or rpm -q lprng. On IRIX: versions -l lpr or check the package version via swlist. Compare the version number against the affected Red Hat 4.0-6.1 or IRIX 6.5.x ranges.
    Affected if The installed version matches one of the listed affected versions (Red Hat 4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 6.0, 6.1 or IRIX 6.5 through 6.5.11).
  3. Determine if lpd daemon is running
    Check running processes: ps -ef | grep lpd or service lpd status. On Red Hat 6.x: /etc/rc.d/init.d/lpd status.
    Affected if The lpd daemon process is currently running on the system.
  4. Verify lpd runs with root privileges
    Check the process owner: ps -ef | grep lpd and look for root as the effective user. Also check file permissions: ls -la /usr/sbin/lpd or /usr/local/sbin/lpd.
    Affected if The lpd process is running as root (UID 0) or the lpd binary has setuid root permissions.
  5. Confirm sendmail configuration file manipulation is possible
    This vulnerability allows a local user to specify an arbitrary configuration file via the -C option when lpd invokes sendmail. Check if sendmail is called from lpd: strings on the lpd binary or review lpd configuration files in /etc/lpd or /etc/printcap.
    Affected if The lpd daemon invokes sendmail and permits manipulation of its command-line arguments, allowing a local user to specify an arbitrary sendmail configuration file.

A user is affected if the lpr/lpd package is installed on a Red Hat 4.0-6.1 or IRIX 6.5.x system, the lpd daemon is running as root, and the daemon allows manipulation of sendmail -C arguments to execute with root privileges.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Remove or disable the vulnerable lpr/lpd package on modern systems; on legacy systems, restrict lpd access, remove setuid root permissions, or upgrade to modern printing systems like CUPS.

Fix this in Linux Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,750
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2000-1220 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2000-1220 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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