CVE-2001-0369
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 lpsched on DGUX version R4.20MU06 and MU02 allows a local attacker to obtain root access via a long command line argument (non-existent printer name).
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 the lpsched (line printer scheduler) daemon on DGUX R4.20MU06 and MU02 allows a local attacker to execute arbitrary code with root privileges by passing an excessively long command line argument, specifically a non-existent printer name.
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= mu02= r4.20mu06CVSS 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.
-
Identify the operating systemRun 'uname -a' or 'uname -sr' to confirm the system is DGUXAffected if The OS is not DGUX or the output does not show DGUX as the operating system
-
Check the DGUX versionExamine /etc/version, /etc/uxrelease, or run 'osinfo -v' to identify the exact DGUX release levelAffected if The version is r4.20mu06 or r4.20mu02 exactly, or falls within the r4.20 mu02 through mu06 range without patches applied
-
Locate the lpsched binaryCheck for the lpsched binary using 'which lpsched' or 'find /usr -name lpsched -type f'Affected if The lpsched binary exists on the system, indicating the vulnerable component is present
-
Verify lpsched is executableRun 'ls -la /usr/lib/lpsched' or the appropriate path from the previous step to check file permissionsAffected if The lpsched binary has execute permissions, meaning it can be invoked and the vulnerability is reachable
A system is affected if it runs DGUX version r4.20mu02 or r4.20mu06, has the lpsched binary present and executable, and the vulnerability is exploitable locally via a long printer name argument to lpsched.
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 local access to the lpsched binary, apply any vendor-supplied patches for DGUX R4.20, or consider upgrading/replacing the legacy DGUX system if vendor support is unavailable.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2001-0369 — 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-2001-0369 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