CVE-2002-1179
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 the S/MIME Parsing capability in Microsoft Outlook Express 5.5 and 6.0 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a digitally signed email with a long "From" address, which triggers the overflow when the user views or previews the message.
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 confidenceBuffer overflow in Microsoft Outlook Express 5.5 and 6.0 S/MIME parsing allows remote code execution via a digitally signed email containing an excessively long 'From' address, which triggers the overflow when the user views or previews the message.
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= 5.5= 6.0CVSS 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 Outlook Express versionOpen Outlook Express, click Help, then About Outlook Express. Alternatively, check the version in Add or Remove Programs (Windows XP) or Programs and Features (Windows Vista/7).Affected if The installed version is exactly 5.5 or 6.0
-
Confirm S/MIME support is presentCheck if Outlook Express has S/MIME capability by looking for security options in Tools > Options > Security, or verify if digital signing certificates are installed.Affected if S/MIME or email security features are available and enabled in Outlook Express
-
Verify digitally signed email handling is enabledIn Outlook Express, go to Tools > Options > Security and check if 'Digitally sign all outgoing messages' is selected, or if the default setting allows handling of digitally signed messages.Affected if The option to handle or send digitally signed emails is enabled in the Outlook Express security settings
A user is affected if they have Outlook Express version 5.5 or 6.0 installed with S/MIME/digital signature support enabled and they view or preview digitally signed emails from potentially untrusted sources.
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 Microsoft security updates for this vulnerability or migrate to a supported email client, as Outlook Express 5.5/6.0 are obsolete. Exercise caution with digitally signed emails from untrusted sources as a defense-in-depth measure.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-1179 — 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-2002-1179 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