CVE-2002-2223
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 NetScreen-Remote 8.0 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code via crafted Internet Key Exchange (IKE) response packets, possibly including (1) a large Security Parameter Index (SPI) field, (2) large number of payloads, or (3) a long payload.
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 NetScreen-Remote 8.0 VPN client software allows remote attackers to cause denial of service and potentially execute arbitrary code through specially crafted IKE response packets containing oversized SPI fields, excessive payloads, or abnormally long payload data.
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= 8.0= 8.0CVSS 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
- High
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:H/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 VPN client softwareCheck the installed programs list or program files directory for 'NetScreen-Remote', 'Juniper NetScreen Remote', or 'Netscreen' VPN client entries. Look in Add/Remove Programs (Windows) or examine C:\Program Files for NetScreen folders.Affected if NetScreen-Remote version 8.0 is present on the system
-
Verify the specific version numberLocate the client executable (typically nsremote.exe or similar in the NetScreen installation folder) and check its file properties for version information, or run 'nsremote.exe -v' if supported.Affected if The installed version is exactly 8.0 (no patches applied)
-
Confirm the IKE/IPSec service is activeCheck if the NetScreen Remote VPN service or daemon is running. On Windows, use Task Manager or 'sc query' to look for NetScreen-related services. On Linux, check for running processes like 'nsremoted' or similar.Affected if The NetScreen Remote VPN client service is running and capable of receiving IKE packets
-
Check network exposure to IKE trafficExamine firewall rules or network configuration to determine if UDP ports 500 (IKE) and 4500 (NAT-T) are open or forwarded to the client system, allowing incoming IKE response packets to reach the vulnerable client.Affected if The system can receive incoming IKE response packets on ports 500/4500
A user is affected if NetScreen-Remote version 8.0 is installed with its VPN service running and exposed to incoming IKE traffic, as the buffer overflow can be triggered by malicious IKE response packets.
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 dataSince NetScreen-Remote 8.0 is discontinued legacy software from 2002, the recommended remediation is to migrate to a modern supported VPN client such as Juniper Secure Connect or current third-party IKEv2/IPSec VPN solutions, as no vendor patch is available for this end-of-life product.
- Consultation12.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing16.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $16,896.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-2223 — 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-2002-2223 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