CVE-2002-0293
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 · uneditedFTP service in Alcatel OmniPCX 4400 allows the "halt" user to gain root privileges by modifying root's .profile 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 · moderate confidenceThe FTP service in Alcatel OmniPCX 4400 contains an authorization flaw that allows the 'halt' user to traverse beyond their designated directory and modify root's .profile file. By inserting malicious commands into root's .profile, the halt user can execute arbitrary code with root privileges upon the next root login.
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= 4400CVSS 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
- High
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:H/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.
-
Confirm Alcatel OmniPCX 4400 productIdentify the system as Alcatel OmniPCX 4400 by checking system information, banner, or documentation. This vulnerability affects only this specific product.Affected if System is not an Alcatel OmniPCX 4400 device - the CVE does not apply.
-
Verify FTP service is enabledCheck if the FTP service is running on the device. This can be done by checking running services, network listeners, or the device's service configuration.Affected if FTP service is disabled - the vulnerability cannot be exploited.
-
Confirm halt user exists and can access FTPVerify the 'halt' user account exists on the system and check if this user is permitted to access the FTP service.Affected if The halt user does not exist or is not allowed FTP access - the specific attack vector is not present.
-
Check file permissions on root .profileInspect the file permissions on /root/.profile (or the equivalent path for root's profile file). Verify that non-privileged users cannot write to this file.Affected if The halt user or other non-privileged users have write access to root's .profile - the privilege escalation path exists.
-
Verify FTP chroot configurationCheck the FTP server configuration to determine if users are restricted to their home directories (chroot jail).Affected if FTP is not configured with chroot restrictions - directory traversal is possible.
A system is affected if it is an Alcatel OmniPCX 4400 with FTP enabled, the halt user can access FTP, and either the halt user can write to root's .profile or the FTP service lacks chroot restrictions.
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 dataCorrect file permissions to prevent non-privileged users from writing to system files such as root's .profile, and configure the FTP service to restrict users to their home directories (chroot jail). Audit other system files for similar permission misconfigurations.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-0293 — 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-2002-0293 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