CVE-2002-1121
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 · uneditedSMTP content filter engines, including (1) GFI MailSecurity for Exchange/SMTP before 7.2, (2) InterScan VirusWall before 3.52 build 1494, (3) the default configuration of MIMEDefang before 2.21, and possibly other products, do not detect fragmented emails as defined in RFC2046 ("Message Fragmentation and Reassembly") and supported in such products as Outlook Express, which allows remote attackers to bypass content filtering, including virus checking, via fragmented emails of the message/partial content type.
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 SMTP content filter engines (GFI MailSecurity, InterScan VirusWall, MIMEDefang) fail to properly handle RFC2046 Message Fragmentation and Reassembly, specifically the message/partial content type. This allows attackers to bypass content filtering and virus scanning by splitting malicious content across multiple email fragments that the filters do not reassemble before scanning.
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= 7.2= 4.0.5= 4.5= 4.5.44= 4.5.74.0= 1.2= 2.14= 2.20= 3.5= 3.51= 3.52CVSS 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 installed email security productReview mail gateway or SMTP proxy configurations, or check running processes for one of these products: GFI MailSecurity, Network Associates Webshield SMTP, Roaring Penguin Canit, Roaring Penguin MIMEDefang, or Trend Micro Interscan VirusWallAffected if The product matches one of the affected products listed in this CVE
-
Check product versionUse product-specific commands or check registry/About dialog to determine the exact version number of the email security productAffected if The installed version exactly matches: GFI MailSecurity 7.2, Webshield SMTP 4.0.5/4.5/4.5.44/4.5.74.0, Canit 1.2, MIMEDefang 2.14/2.20, or Interscan VirusWall 3.5/3.51/3.52
-
Inspect email traffic for message/partial content typeReview SMTP gateway logs or capture network traffic to identify if emails with Content-Type: message/partial are being processed by the filterAffected if The product is receiving and scanning emails with message/partial content type without reassembling fragments before content inspection
-
Verify fragment reassembly behaviorSend a test email split into multiple message/partial fragments containing a known test pattern or EICAR file, then check if the filter detects the malicious content after reassembly or only scans individual fragmentsAffected if The filter scans each fragment separately and fails to detect malicious content that would be detected after proper reassembly
A user is affected if they are running one of the listed product versions AND their email gateway processes message/partial type emails without reassembling fragments before content filtering.
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 dataUpdate affected email security products to versions that properly implement RFC2046 fragmentation reassembly before content filtering, or implement additional filter layers that handle message/partial type reassembly.
- 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-2002-1121 — 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-2002-1121 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