CVE-2002-0885
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 · uneditedMultiple buffer overflows in in.rarpd (ARP server) on Solaris, and possibly other operating systems including Caldera UnixWare and Open UNIX, allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code, possibly via the functions (1) syserr and (2) error.
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 confidenceMultiple buffer overflow vulnerabilities exist in the in.rarpd (Reverse ARP daemon) on Solaris and possibly Caldera UnixWare/Open UNIX. The overflows occur in the syserr and error functions, allowing remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via crafted network packets to the ARP service.
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= 7.1.1= 8.0= 5.7= 5.8CVSS 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.
-
Identify the operating system versionRun 'uname -a' or check /etc/release to determine the exact OS versionAffected if The OS is SunOS 5.7, SunOS 5.8, Caldera Unixware 7.1.1, or Caldera Openunix 8.0
-
Locate the in.rarpd binaryRun 'find /usr/sbin -name rarpd' or 'which in.rarpd' to locate the binaryAffected if The in.rarpd binary exists on the system
-
Verify if the rarpd service is runningRun 'ps -ef | grep rarpd' or check running processes for rarpdAffected if The in.rarpd process is currently running
-
Check if RARP is enabled in the network service configurationInspect /etc/inetd.conf or run 'inetadm | grep rarp' to see if RARP service is enabledAffected if RARP is listed as an active service in inetd/xinetd configuration
-
Confirm the service is listening on the networkRun 'netstat -an | grep 3' (RARP uses port 3) or 'rpcinfo -p | grep rarp' to check for RARP network listenersAffected if The system is accepting RARP connections on the network
The environment is affected if running a matched OS version (Sunos 5.7/5.8 or Caldera Unixware 7.1.1/Openunix 8.0) AND the in.rarpd binary exists AND the RARP service is enabled and listening.
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 in.rarpd service if not required; if required, apply vendor patches for the affected operating system. Consider network isolation to limit exposure to untrusted networks.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,456.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-0885 — 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-2002-0885 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