CVE-2002-0700
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 a system function that performs user authentication for Microsoft Content Management Server (MCMS) 2001 allows attackers to execute code in the Local System context by authenticating to a web page that calls the function, aka "Unchecked Buffer in MDAC Function Could Enable SQL Server Compromise."
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 confidenceBuffer overflow in the user authentication function of Microsoft Content Management Server (MCMS) 2001 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code in Local System context by sending specially crafted authentication requests to web pages that invoke the vulnerable function.
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= 2001CVSS 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 MCMS 2001 is installedCheck for MCMS 2001 installation by examining the registry key HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\ContentManagementServer or by looking for the MCMS installation directory (typically C:\Program Files\Microsoft Content Management Server)Affected if MCMS 2001 is present on the system
-
Confirm the exact MCMS versionCheck the installed version through the registry key HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\ContentManagementServer\Version or examine the version property of the MCMS service via Services consoleAffected if The installed version is Microsoft Content Management Server 2001
-
Identify exposed web authentication endpointsReview IIS manager for MCMS web applications and virtual directories, specifically look for pages that handle user authentication (typically under /NR/ or /CmsAuthoring/ paths)Affected if Web pages that invoke the user authentication function are accessible over the network
-
Examine authentication logs for exploitation attemptsReview IIS log files (typically in C:\WINDOWS\system32\LogFiles) and MCMS-specific logs for unusually long strings in authentication parameters or failed authentication attempts with malformed dataAffected if Logs show malformed authentication requests with oversized input to the login/authentication functions
The environment is affected if Microsoft Content Management Server 2001 is installed and its web-based authentication function is network-accessible, regardless of whether exploitation has occurred.
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 the relevant Microsoft security patch for MCMS 2001; if patches are unavailable for this legacy system, consider upgrading to a supported version or implementing network segmentation and web application firewall rules to limit exposure.
- 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-2002-0700 — 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-2002-0700 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