CVE-2003-0057
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 · uneditedMultiple buffer overflows in Hypermail 2 before 2.1.6 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code (1) via a long attachment filename that is not properly handled by the hypermail executable, or (2) by connecting to the mail CGI program from an IP address that reverse-resolves to a long hostname.
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 confidenceHypermail 2 versions prior to 2.1.6 contain multiple buffer overflow vulnerabilities in the attachment filename handling and reverse DNS lookup processing. Remote attackers can exploit these flaws by providing an excessively long attachment filename or connecting from an IP address that reverse-resolves to a long hostname, potentially achieving arbitrary code execution or causing denial of 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= 2.0b25= 2.1.1= 2.1.2= 2.1.3= 2.1.4= 2.1.5= 2.1_.0CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/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.
-
Identify Hypermail installationCheck for the hypermail binary on the system using 'which hypermail' or search common locations such as /usr/bin/hypermail, /usr/local/bin/hypermail, or within web server cgi-bin directories.Affected if Hypermail is not found on the system.
-
Determine installed versionRun 'hypermail -v' or 'hypermail --version' to display the version number. Alternatively, check the RPM package with 'rpm -q hypermail' or review the source directory if compiled from source.Affected if The version is 2.0b25, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 2.1.5, or 2.1_.0, or any version prior to 2.1.6.
-
Verify CGI interface is enabledInspect the web server configuration to determine if Hypermail CGI (typically named hypermail, hypermail.cgi, or mail2html) is accessible via HTTP. Check httpd.conf or equivalent for CGI script aliases, or attempt to access the CGI endpoint directly.Affected if The Hypermail CGI interface is exposed and accessible to remote users.
-
Confirm attachment handling is activeReview the Hypermail configuration file (hypermail.rc or hypermail.cfg) for the 'attachments' or 'attachment' directive. Check if attachments are being processed and stored by the web server.Affected if Attachment processing is enabled and the CGI can accept file uploads or process attachment filenames.
-
Check reverse DNS lookup behaviorExamine the Hypermail configuration for directives controlling hostname resolution, such as 'domain' or 'hostname' settings. Review web server logs for reverse DNS lookups performed on connecting IP addresses.Affected if Reverse DNS lookups are being performed on client connections, which triggers the hostname processing vulnerable to overflow.
The environment is affected if Hypermail version 2.1.5 or earlier (including 2.0b25 and 2.1_.0) is installed with the CGI interface enabled and either attachment handling or reverse DNS lookups are active.
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 to Hypermail 2.1.6 or later to remediate the buffer overflow vulnerabilities. If immediate patching is not feasible, restrict or disable the CGI interface and implement input validation on attachment filenames and hostname data.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2003-0057 — 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-2003-0057 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