CVE-2003-1569
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 · uneditedGoAhead WebServer before 2.1.5 on Windows 95, 98, and ME allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via an HTTP request with a (1) con, (2) nul, (3) clock$, or (4) config$ device name in a path component, different vectors than CVE-2001-0385.
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 confidenceGoAhead WebServer versions before 2.1.5 on Windows 95/98/ME contain a denial of service vulnerability where HTTP requests containing Windows reserved device names (con, nul, clock$, config$) in the URL path cause the server to crash. The vulnerability exploits how the web server handles these special device file references on older Windows platforms.
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<= 2.1.4= 2.0= 2.1= 2.1.1= 2.1.2= 2.1.3CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Check Windows operating system versionRun 'winver' or check system properties - the vulnerability only affects Windows 95, 98, and MEAffected if The OS is Windows 95, Windows 98, or Windows ME (any version)
-
Identify if GoAhead WebServer is installedCheck for the presence of GoAhead WebServer process or installation directory (commonly in Program Files or the web server root)Affected if GoAhead WebServer is installed and running on the system
-
Determine GoAhead WebServer versionCheck the server version via the HTTP banner, admin interface, or check the executable/property details - look for version 2.0 through 2.1.4Affected if The installed version is 2.0, 2.1, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.3, or 2.1.4 (any version 2.1.4 or lower)
-
Confirm web server is accessible over networkVerify the GoAhead WebServer is listening on an HTTP port and accepting requestsAffected if The web server is exposed and accepting HTTP connections
You are affected if you are running GoAhead WebServer version 2.1.4 or lower on Windows 95, 98, or ME and the web server is accessible to process HTTP requests.
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 GoAhead WebServer 2.1.5 or later which includes proper input validation for reserved device names. Additionally, migrate away from end-of-life Windows platforms (95/98/ME) to supported operating systems.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2003-1569 — 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-2003-1569 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