CVE-2002-0858
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 · uneditedcatsnmp in Oracle 9i and 8i is installed with a dbsnmp user with a default dbsnmp password, which allows attackers to perform restricted database operations and possibly gain other privileges.
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 confidenceThe catsnmp component in Oracle 9i and 8i creates a default database user (dbsnmp) with a default password during installation. Attackers with knowledge of these default credentials can authenticate to the database and perform restricted database operations, potentially escalating privileges.
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 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
- 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 if dbsnmp user existsQuery DBA_USERS or USER_ACCOUNT view: SELECT username, account_status FROM dba_users WHERE username = 'DBSNMP';Affected if The dbsnmp user account is present in the database (regardless of status, it indicates the default account was created during installation)
-
Check dbsnmp account statusQuery account_status column from dba_users for the dbsnmp user. Common statuses: OPEN, LOCKED, EXPIRED, EXPIRED(GRACE).Affected if Account status is OPEN, meaning the account can accept authentication attempts
-
Test default credential authenticationAttempt to authenticate to the database using the dbsnmp username with the documented default password for that Oracle version. If authentication succeeds, the default password is still active.Affected if Authentication succeeds with the default password, confirming the vulnerability is present
-
Review dbsnmp user privilegesQuery DBA_ROLE_PRIVS and DBA_SYS_PRIVS for dbsnmp: SELECT * FROM dba_role_privs WHERE grantee='DBSNMP'; SELECT * FROM dba_sys_privs WHERE grantee='DBSNMP';Affected if The dbsnmp account has been granted elevated privileges that could aid in privilege escalation if compromised
-
Audit recent dbsnmp login activityQuery Oracle audit trails: SELECT timestamp, username, userhost, action_name FROM dba_audit_trail WHERE username='DBSNMP' ORDER BY timestamp desc;Affected if Unusual or unauthorized login attempts from unknown hosts are present
The environment is affected if the dbsnmp database user exists and remains accessible using default credentials, allowing remote attackers to authenticate and perform restricted database operations.
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 dataImmediately change the default dbsnmp user password to a strong, unique value following Oracle password best practices, and verify that any dependent monitoring or management functionality continues to operate correctly after the change.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $3,392.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-0858 — 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-2002-0858 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