CVE-2002-0699
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 · uneditedUnknown vulnerability in the Certificate Enrollment ActiveX Control in Microsoft Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows Millennium, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000, and Windows XP allow remote attackers to delete digital certificates on a user's system via HTML.
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 confidenceA vulnerability exists in the Certificate Enrollment ActiveX Control in Windows 98/98SE/Me/NT 4.0/2000/XP that allows remote attackers to delete digital certificates on a user's system through malicious HTML content (likely embedded in web pages). The ActiveX control does not properly validate input, permitting unauthorized certificate deletion.
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 versionsall versionsall versionsall versions= 4.0all versionsCVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
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 Windows versionRun 'winver' from the command prompt or check System Properties to confirm the Windows versionAffected if The system is running Windows 98, Windows 98SE, Windows Me, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000, or Windows XP (all versions of these products are affected)
-
Locate the Certificate Enrollment ActiveX controlSearch for the file xenroll.dll in the system (typically in C:\Windows\System32 or C:\WINNT\System32)Affected if The file xenroll.dll exists on the system, indicating the vulnerable ActiveX control is installed
-
Check if the ActiveX control is registeredRun 'regsvr32 /s xenroll.dll' to check registration status, or look in the Windows registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run or component categories for xenroll entriesAffected if The control is registered as an ActiveX component on the system
-
Verify Internet Explorer security settingsOpen Internet Explorer, go to Tools > Internet Options > Security > Custom Level, and check the settings under 'ActiveX controls and plug-ins' for 'Allow Scriptlets' or similar ActiveX permission settingsAffected if ActiveX controls are permitted to run (the default setting) in Internet Explorer security zones
A system is affected if it runs any version of Windows 98/98SE/Me/NT 4.0/2000/XP AND has the Certificate Enrollment ActiveX control (xenroll.dll) present with ActiveX execution enabled in the browser.
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 dataDisable the Certificate Enrollment ActiveX Control via browser security settings or Group Policy; migrate from legacy unsupported Windows versions to supported operating systems.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-0699 — 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-2002-0699 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