HTTP ServerWeb server / proxy · Apache
CVE-2002-0061
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 · uneditedApache for Win32 before 1.3.24, and 2.0.x before 2.0.34-beta, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters (a | pipe character) provided as arguments to batch (.bat) or .cmd scripts, which are sent unfiltered to the shell interpreter, typically cmd.exe.
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 confidenceApache for Win32 versions before 1.3.24 and 2.0.x before 2.0.34-beta contain a command injection vulnerability where shell metacharacters (specifically the pipe character |) in arguments to batch (.bat) or .cmd scripts are passed unfiltered to cmd.exe, allowing remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands.
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
HTTP ServerWeb server / proxy
< 1.3.24>= 2.0.0, < 2.0.34CVSS 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.
-
Confirm Windows platformVerify the operating system is a Windows variant (Win32). This vulnerability only affects Apache running on Windows.Affected if The system is running Apache on Windows - other platforms are not affected by this CVE.
-
Identify Apache versionRun 'httpd -v' (or 'apachectl -v') from the Apache installation directory, or check the ServerTokens/ServerVersion directives in httpd.conf.Affected if The installed version is Apache 1.3.x before 1.3.24, or Apache 2.0.x before 2.0.34-beta.
-
Check for CGI script executionSearch httpd.conf for 'ScriptAlias', 'AddHandler cgi-script', or 'Options +ExecCGI' directives. Also look for .bat or .cmd file extensions in the cgi-bin directory.Affected if CGI execution is enabled and .bat or .cmd scripts are present or configured to be executed.
-
Review CGI script invocationExamine any custom batch or cmd scripts invoked by Apache (typically in cgi-bin/) to see if they accept user-supplied arguments that could contain shell metacharacters.Affected if Batch or cmd scripts accept and pass URL parameters or query string arguments to the shell without filtering pipe (|) characters.
A Windows server is affected if it runs Apache versions below 1.3.24 or 2.0.34-beta AND has CGI scripts (especially .bat/.cmd) that pass unsanitized arguments to the command shell.
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 data1.3.242.0.34
Upgrade Apache for Win32 to version 1.3.24 or later, or 2.0.34-beta or later. Review and audit any custom batch or cmd scripts invoked by Apache to ensure proper input sanitization.
Fix this in HTTP Server
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-0061 — 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-2002-0061 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