Suse LinuxOperating system · Suse

CVE-2002-1285

HIGH · 7.2 CVSS v2.0 Published 2002-11-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
77/100
Remediation priority · High
No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
runlpr in the LPRng package allows the local lp user to gain root privileges via certain command line arguments.

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 · moderate confidence

The runlpr binary in the LPRng print spooling package contains a local privilege escalation vulnerability. The lp user can manipulate certain command line arguments to execute arbitrary code with root privileges, likely due to improper privilege dropping or unsafe use of elevated privileges within the binary.

MitigationRemove the setuid bit from /usr/bin/runlpr (or wherever located), upgrade to a patched version of LPRng if available, or migrate to a modern print system like CUPS which does not have this vulnerability.

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
Suse LinuxOperating system
Affected:= 7.0= 7.1= 7.2= 7.3= 8.0= 8.1

CVSS 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
Local
Complexity
Low
Authentication
None
Confidentiality
Complete
Integrity
Complete
Availability
Complete

AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Check if LPRng package is installed
    Query the package manager: rpm -qa | grep -i lprng (for RPM-based) or dpkg -l | grep -i lprng (for Debian-based)
    Affected if LPRng package is installed
  2. Locate the runlpr binary
    Find the binary: find /usr -name runlpr -type f 2>/dev/null
    Affected if runlpr binary exists on the system
  3. Check if runlpr has setuid root permissions
    Run: ls -la /usr/bin/runlpr (or the path found above) and examine the permissions
    Affected if The file has the setuid bit set (permissions show 's' in the owner execute field) and is owned by root
  4. Verify the lp service account exists
    Check for lp user: id lp or getent passwd lp
    Affected if The lp user account exists on the system (required for the privilege escalation vector)
  5. Confirm runlpr is executable by lp user
    Run: stat -c '%a' /usr/bin/runlpr and verify the executable bit is set for others or the lp user
    Affected if The binary has execute permissions for other users or specifically for the lp user

The system is vulnerable if the runlpr binary exists, is owned by root, has the setuid bit set, and the lp user exists and can execute it.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Remove the setuid bit from /usr/bin/runlpr (or wherever located), upgrade to a patched version of LPRng if available, or migrate to a modern print system like CUPS which does not have this vulnerability.

Fix this in Suse Linux Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation1.0 h
  • Testing1.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
5.0 hours of engineering $910
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-1285 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2002-1285 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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