CVE-2001-1484
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 · uneditedAlcatel ADSL modems allow remote attackers to access the Trivial File Transfer Protocol (TFTP) to modify firmware and configuration via a bounce attack from a system on the local area network (LAN) side, which is allowed to access TFTP without authentication.
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 confidenceAlcatel ADSL modems expose an unauthenticated TFTP service to the LAN side, allowing remote attackers to use a bounce attack from an internal system to modify device firmware and configuration. The vulnerability stems from the modem accepting TFTP connections from any LAN device without authentication.
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 dataall versions= homeCVSS 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.
-
Identify the Alcatel modem modelCheck the device label, web interface, or management console to confirm the exact model is an Alcatel Adsl Modem 1000 or Alcatel Speed Touch Adsl Modem (home version)Affected if The device is an Alcatel Adsl Modem 1000 (any version) or Alcatel Speed Touch Adsl Modem home version
-
Verify TFTP service is accessible on LANFrom a host on the LAN side, attempt to connect to UDP port 69 on the modem's LAN IP address, or use a TFTP client to send a read request for any fileAffected if The modem responds to TFTP requests on UDP port 69 from LAN hosts
-
Confirm TFTP requires no authenticationSend a TFTP read or write request to the modem without providing any credentials - observe if the connection is accepted and processedAffected if The modem accepts and processes TFTP requests without requiring any authentication
-
Check if TFTP is enabled by defaultAccess the modem web interface or management console and look for TFTP service settings or configuration optionsAffected if TFTP service is enabled by default with no authentication requirement
A defender is affected if they have an Alcatel Adsl Modem 1000 or Speed Touch home modem with TFTP service (UDP 69) exposed and accessible from the LAN without authentication.
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 dataApply vendor firmware updates if available; otherwise, segment the modem on an isolated VLAN or implement firewall rules to block TFTP traffic from untrusted LAN hosts.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2001-1484 — 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-2001-1484 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