CVE-2004-0050
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 · uneditedVerity Ultraseek before 5.2.2 allows remote attackers to obtain the full pathname of the document root via an MS-DOS device name in the web search option, such as (1) NUL, (2) CON, (3) AUX, (4) COM1, (5) COM2, and others.
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 confidenceVerity Ultraseek before version 5.2.2 contains an information disclosure vulnerability where the web search functionality fails to sanitize MS-DOS device names (NUL, CON, AUX, COM1, COM2, etc.). Attackers can craft search queries using these device names to elicit the full filesystem path of the document root.
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<= 5.2.1CVSS 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/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.
-
Identify the installed Verity Ultraseek versionLocate the version information for the Verity Ultraseek installation, typically found in product documentation, About pages, or installation directoriesAffected if The installed version is 5.2.1 or earlier (any version below 5.2.2)
-
Confirm the web search interface is activeVerify that the Verity Ultraseek web search functionality is running and accessible on the networkAffected if The search interface is exposed and accepts user input
-
Test for MS-DOS device name handling in search queriesSubmit a search query containing a known MS-DOS device name such as NUL, CON, AUX, COM1, or LPT1 to the search endpointAffected if The response returns filesystem path information or reveals the document root location
A user is affected if Verity Ultraseek version 5.2.1 or earlier is installed and the web search interface is accessible, allowing MS-DOS device names in search queries to expose filesystem paths.
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 Verity Ultraseek 5.2.2 or later. If upgrading is not feasible, implement input validation to reject or sanitize MS-DOS device names in search parameters.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2004-0050 — 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-2004-0050 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