CVE-2002-1264
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 Oracle iSQL*Plus web application of the Oracle 9 database server allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long USERID parameter in the isqlplus URL.
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 vulnerability in Oracle iSQL*Plus web application allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code by submitting an excessively long USERID parameter in the isqlplus URL. The application fails to properly bounds-check user input before copying it into a fixed-size buffer.
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= 9.0= 9.0.1= 9.0.1.2= 9.0.1.3= 9.0.2= release_2_9.2.1= release_2_9.2.2CVSS 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.
-
Confirm iSQL*Plus web interface is runningCheck if the iSQL*Plus HTTP service is listening by examining running services or attempting to access the iSQL*Plus URL (typically port 7778 or 5560)Affected if iSQL*Plus web interface is accessible and responding to requests
-
Identify Oracle database versionConnect to the database and run: SELECT * FROM v$VERSION; or check the Oracle installation directory for version filesAffected if The installed version matches any of: 9.0, 9.0.1, 9.0.1.2, 9.0.1.3, 9.0.2, release_2_9.2.1, or release_2_9.2.2
-
Verify iSQL*Plus component is installedCheck for the presence of the iSQL*Plus application files in the Oracle home directory, typically under $ORACLE_HOME/oc4j or check the Oracle Management Server for iSQL*Plus componentsAffected if iSQL*Plus is installed and available as a web application
-
Confirm network exposure of iSQL*PlusReview firewall rules or network configuration to determine if the iSQL*Plus HTTP port (default 7778) is exposed to untrusted networksAffected if The iSQL*Plus interface is reachable from network segments outside the trusted database administration zone
The environment is affected if Oracle9i versions 9.0.x, 9.0.1.x, 9.0.2, or 9.2.1.x through 9.2.2.x are installed with the iSQL*Plus web interface exposed on the network.
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 Oracle security patches for the affected Oracle 9i version; if patches are unavailable for this legacy version, consider upgrading to a supported Oracle release or implementing network-level filtering to restrict access to the iSQL*Plus interface.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,928.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-1264 — 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-2002-1264 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