CVE-2001-1531
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 Claris Emailer 2.0v2 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code via an email attachment with a long filename.
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 vulnerability in Claris Emailer 2.0v2 when processing email attachments with excessively long filenames, allowing remote attackers to crash the application (denial of service) or potentially achieve arbitrary code execution.
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= 2.0v2CVSS 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 Claris Emailer versionCheck installed application version - typically in the application About menu or the application's bundle info. On classic Mac OS, select Claris Emailer and choose Get Info. On Mac OS X, right-click and select Get Info to view version.Affected if Installed version is exactly 2.0v2
-
Confirm application is configured for emailCheck if Claris Emailer is set as the default email client or is actively used for receiving/processing email. Look for email accounts configured within the application.Affected if Claris Emailer 2.0v2 is configured as an active email client with accounts set up
-
Check for running processVerify if Claris Emailer process is currently running. On Mac OS 9, check in the Finder or using Activity Monitor on OS X. On classic Mac OS, check running applications in the Apple menu.Affected if Claris Emailer 2.0v2 is currently running and processing email
A user is affected if they have Claris Emailer version 2.0v2 installed, configured as an active email client, and the application is running to process email attachments.
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 dataMigrate from Claris Emailer 2.0v2 to a supported modern email client, as this legacy software from the early 2000s is no longer maintained; avoid opening attachments from untrusted sources if continued use is unavoidable.
- 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-2001-1531 — 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-2001-1531 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