CVE-2002-2346
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 · uneditedphpBB 2.0 through 2.0.3 generates names for uploaded avatar files with the hex-encoded IP address of the client system, which allows remote attackers to obtain client IP addresses.
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 confidencephpBB 2.0 through 2.0.3 stores uploaded avatar files using filenames derived from the client's hex-encoded IP address. This exposes user IP addresses to anyone who can access or guess avatar file paths, creating a privacy violation and potential information gathering vector for attackers.
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= 2.0= 2.0.1= 2.0.2= 2.0.3CVSS 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.
-
Identify phpBB versionCheck the version.php file in your phpBB installation root directory, or look at the footer of the admin panel. Common path: /includes/version.php or view the page source of any phpBB page for a meta generator tag.Affected if The version is 2.0, 2.0.1, 2.0.2, or 2.0.3 specifically.
-
Confirm avatar upload is enabledLog into the phpBB admin panel, navigate to General Admin > Avatar settings, or check the configuration table for avatar settings. Look for 'allow_avatar_upload' and 'allow_avatar_local' configuration values.Affected if Avatar uploads are allowed (either remote URL uploads or local upload is enabled) in the forum configuration.
-
Examine avatar file naming patternNavigate to the images/avatars directory (default path: /images/avatars/). List the files and observe the naming convention. A hex-encoded IP-based filename would appear as a 8-character hexadecimal string (e.g., 7f000001 for 127.0.0.1).Affected if Avatar files are named using 8-character hex strings that correspond to user IP addresses when converted to decimal IP format.
-
Review avatar upload codeExamine the file includes/functions_upload.php or similar avatar handling code. Look for the function that generates avatar filenames, specifically any use of phpbb_ip_to_dec or similar IP-to-hex conversion logic.Affected if The code contains functions that convert user IP addresses to hex strings for use as filenames.
You are affected if phpBB version is 2.0-2.0.3 AND avatar uploads are enabled AND avatar filenames follow a hex-based pattern corresponding to user IP addresses.
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 dataReplace the IP-based avatar filename generation with random or sequential identifiers (e.g., UUID or database ID-based filenames) to prevent IP address disclosure. Upgrade to phpBB 2.0.4 or later if available.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-2346 — 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-2002-2346 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