CVE-2002-0822
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 · uneditedEthereal 0.9.4 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly excecute arbitrary code via the (1) SOCKS, (2) RSVP, (3) AFS, or (4) LMP dissectors, which can be caused to core dump.
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 confidenceEthereal 0.9.4 and earlier contains buffer overflow vulnerabilities in the SOCKS, RSVP, AFS, and LMP protocol dissectors. When these dissectors process malformed network packets, they can trigger a core dump causing denial of service, and potentially allow arbitrary code execution with the privileges of the running process.
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<= 0.9.4CVSS 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.
-
Check if Ethereal is installedRun 'ethereal -v' or 'which ethereal' to see if the Ethereal network protocol analyzer is present on the systemAffected if Ethereal is installed and running on the system
-
Determine installed Ethereal versionRun 'ethereal -v' to display the version number and compare it to the affected range: 0.9.4 and earlierAffected if The installed version is Ethereal 0.9.4 or any version earlier than 0.9.4
-
Identify enabled protocol dissectorsLaunch Ethereal and go to Analyze > Enabled Protocols, or check the configuration file (often ~/.ethereal or /etc/ethereal) for enabled dissectorsAffected if Any of these dissectors are enabled: SOCKS, RSVP, AFS, or LMP
-
Verify packet capture capability on affected protocolsWhile Ethereal is capturing, check if traffic on ports commonly associated with SOCKS (1080), RSVP, AFS, or LMP is being dissectedAffected if Ethereal is actively dissecting packets for SOCKS, RSVP, AFS, or LMP protocols
You are affected if Ethereal version 0.9.4 or earlier is installed AND one or more of the SOCKS, RSVP, AFS, or LMP dissectors are enabled and processing network traffic.
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 dataUpgrade Ethereal/Wireshark to a version newer than 0.9.4. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, disable the affected dissectors (SOCKS, RSVP, AFS, LMP) to reduce attack surface while maintaining partial functionality.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,232.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-0822 — 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-2002-0822 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