CVE-2002-2224
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 PGPFreeware 7.03 running on Windows NT 4.0 SP6 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 PGPFreeware 7.03's IKE (Internet Key Exchange) implementation on Windows NT 4.0 SP6. The vulnerability is triggered by specially crafted IKE response packets containing oversized SPI fields, excessive numbers of payloads, or abnormally long payload data, leading to buffer overflow that can cause denial of service or potentially enable arbitrary code execution.
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= 7.03CVSS 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.
-
Verify PGPFreeware versionCheck the installed version of PGPFreeware by opening the application or checking Add/Remove Programs in the Windows Control Panel. Look for version 7.03 specifically.Affected if The installed version is exactly 7.03 (Network Associates PGP Freeware)
-
Confirm Windows NT 4.0 SP6Check the operating system version by running 'winver' or right-clicking My Computer and selecting Properties. Verify the system is Windows NT 4.0 with Service Pack 6.Affected if The operating system is Windows NT 4.0 Service Pack 6
-
Check IKE service statusVerify whether the IKE (Internet Key Exchange) service is running or enabled. On Windows NT 4.0, this can be checked via the Services control panel or by running 'net start' to list running services.Affected if The IKE service is enabled or running on the affected system
-
Inspect IKE configurationCheck for any IKE-related configuration files or registry entries that indicate IKE is configured for use, typically related to IPsec VPN settings.Affected if IKE is configured or actively used for IPsec negotiations
A system is affected if it is running PGPFreeware version 7.03 on Windows NT 4.0 SP6 with the IKE service enabled or configured.
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 dataThis is a legacy system from 2002 that is no longer supported. The recommended remediation is to migrate away from PGPFreeware 7.03 and Windows NT 4.0 to modern, supported encryption solutions. If IKE is not required, disable the IKE service; otherwise, implement network-level controls to restrict IKE traffic to trusted sources only.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation40.0 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 $20,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-2224 — 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-2002-2224 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