CVE-2002-2366
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 the XML parser of Trillian 0.6351, 0.725 and 0.73 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) and possibly execute arbitrary code via a skin with a long colors file name in trillian.xml.
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 Trillian's XML parser allows remote attackers to cause denial of service and potentially execute arbitrary code via a skin file (trillian.xml) containing an excessively long colors filename. The vulnerability exists in versions 0.6351, 0.725, and 0.73 of the Trillian instant messaging client.
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= 0.73= 0.725= 0.6351CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/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 Trillian installationCheck for Trillian installation directory (typically C:\Program Files\Trillian or C:\Program Files (x86)\Trillian) and verify the executable existsAffected if Trillian is installed on the system
-
Determine installed Trillian versionRight-click trillian.exe, select Properties, and check the Version tab for the product version; or launch Trillian and go to Help > About TrillianAffected if Version displayed is 0.6351, 0.725, or 0.73 exactly
-
Confirm skin functionality is in useCheck for the presence of trillian.xml skin file in the users AppData\Roaming\Trillian\skins folder or the program's skins directoryAffected if Skin files are present and skins feature is enabled (default behavior)
-
Identify vulnerable XML parser configurationExamine the trillian.xml skin file for the colors filename entry; look for unusually long filename strings in the colors or themes sectionAffected if Colors filename value exceeds normal length (typical values are under 100 characters)
User is affected if Trillian versions 0.6351, 0.725, or 0.73 are installed with skins functionality enabled and a trillian.xml skin file containing an excessively long colors filename is present.
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 dataTrillian versions 0.73 and earlier from 2002 are no longer supported; users should migrate to current Trillian versions or use alternative instant messaging platforms, as no patch is available for these legacy versions.
- Consultation1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-2366 — 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-2002-2366 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