CVE-2002-2372
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 · uneditedThe telnet server in Infoprint 21 running controller software before 1.056007 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) via a long username, possibly due to a buffer overflow.
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 · moderate confidenceThe telnet server in Infoprint 21 printer controller software versions prior to 1.056007 contains a buffer overflow vulnerability when processing overly long username strings during authentication, allowing unauthenticated remote attackers to crash the service.
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= 1.047012CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/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 the device modelCheck if the system is an IBM Infoprint 21 printer controller by querying the device model via web UI, SNMP, or physical labelAffected if Device model is not IBM Infoprint 21 (not affected)
-
Determine Infoprint controller software versionAccess the printer web interface or use SNMP to query the controller software version. Typical path: Web UI > Status or Configuration page showing firmware/controller versionAffected if Unable to determine version (cannot assess)
-
Compare version to affected rangeCompare the installed controller software version against 1.056007. Versions prior to 1.056007 are affected (e.g., 1.047012 is explicitly listed as vulnerable)Affected if Installed version is less than 1.056007 (vulnerable)
-
Verify telnet service statusCheck if the telnet service is enabled and listening on the network. Use command such as 'netstat -an | grep 23' or scan port 23 from an external hostAffected if Telnet port 23 is open and accessible (exploitable condition present)
The system is affected if it is an IBM Infoprint 21 controller running software version prior to 1.056007 AND the telnet service is enabled and accessible on the network.
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 dataUpgrade the Infoprint 21 controller software to version 1.056007 or later to patch the buffer overflow vulnerability; if immediate patching is not feasible, restrict network access to the telnet port or disable the telnet service.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-2372 — 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-2002-2372 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