CVE-2003-0021
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 "screen dump" feature in Eterm 0.9.1 and earlier allows attackers to overwrite arbitrary files via a certain character escape sequence when it is echoed to a user's terminal, e.g. when the user views a file containing the malicious sequence.
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 Eterm terminal emulator's 'screen dump' feature contains an arbitrary file overwrite vulnerability. Attackers can embed a malicious character escape sequence in a file that, when viewed by a user (e.g., via cat or less), triggers Eterm to write screen dump contents to an attacker-specified file path instead of the intended default location.
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= 0.8.10= 0.9.1CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/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.
-
Check if Eterm is installedRun 'Eterm --version' or check your package manager for installed Eterm packages (e.g., 'rpm -q Eterm' or 'dpkg -l | grep Eterm')Affected if Eterm is installed and the version matches 0.8.10 or 0.9.1
-
Confirm installed Eterm versionExamine the version output from step 1 and compare it against the affected versions 0.8.10 and 0.9.1Affected if The installed version is exactly 0.8.10 or exactly 0.9.1
-
Locate Eterm configuration filesLook for Eterm config in ~/.Eterm/ or /etc/Eterm/ directories, typically named 'Eterm.cfg' or similarAffected if A user-specific or system-wide Eterm configuration file exists with screen dump settings
-
Check for screen dump escape sequence configurationInspect the configuration file for options related to 'screen dump', 'dump', or 'escape sequence' handling (search for keywords like 'screen.dump', 'allow_dumps', or similar)Affected if The configuration allows or enables screen dump escape sequence functionality (feature is not explicitly disabled)
You are affected if Eterm version 0.8.10 or 0.9.1 is installed and the screen dump escape sequence feature is enabled in the configuration.
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 Eterm to a version newer than 0.9.1, or disable the screen dump escape sequence functionality through Eterm configuration settings to prevent arbitrary file writes.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2003-0021 — 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-2003-0021 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