CVE-2002-1718
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 · uneditedMicrosoft Internet Information Server (IIS) 5.1 may allow remote attackers to view the contents of a Frontpage Server Extension (FPSE) file, as claimed using an HTTP request for colegal.htm that contains .. (dot dot) sequences.
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 confidenceIIS 5.1 with Frontpage Server Extensions contains a path traversal vulnerability where HTTP requests containing '..' (dot-dot) sequences allow remote attackers to access arbitrary FPSE files on the server, exposing potentially sensitive content.
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= 5.1CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
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 IIS version is 5.1Check the IIS version by running 'inetmgr' and looking at the About information, or check the Windows version (Windows XP Pro ships with IIS 5.1)Affected if The installed version is IIS 5.1 specifically
-
Verify Frontpage Server Extensions are installedCheck for the presence of FPSE by looking for the _vti_bin directory under the web root, or check Add/Remove Programs for Microsoft Frontpage Server Extensions 2002Affected if FPSE is installed and enabled on the IIS server
-
Confirm FPSE is enabled for web sitesCheck IIS Manager under the Web Service Extensions folder, or verify that _vti_bin is accessible via HTTP on any configured websiteAffected if FPSE is allowed and accessible on any website
-
Test for path traversal vulnerabilitySend an HTTP request containing '..' sequences to the server targeting FPSE directories, such as GET /_vti_bin/..\..\..\winnt/system32/config HTTP/1.1Affected if The server returns content from paths outside the web root
The system is affected if it runs IIS 5.1 with Frontpage Server Extensions installed and enabled, allowing the path traversal flaw to be exploited.
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 available Microsoft patches for IIS and Frontpage Server Extensions, or remove FPSE if not required. Implement URL input validation to block path traversal sequences.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-1718 — 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-2002-1718 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