CVE-2004-0243
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 · uneditedAIX 4.3.3 through AIX 5.1, when direct remote login is disabled, displays a different message if the password is correct, which allows remote attackers to guess the password via brute force methods.
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 confidenceAIX 4.3.3 through 5.1 exhibits different login failure messages depending on whether the username or password is correct. When direct remote login is disabled, the system reveals whether a valid username was supplied through message differences, enabling remote attackers to perform brute force attacks by iterating through potential usernames and passwords while observing response variations.
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 dataall versions>= 4.3.3, <= 5.1CVSS 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.
-
Check AIX versionRun 'oslevel -r' or 'lslpp -Ac | grep bos.rte' to get the installed AIX version numberAffected if The version falls between 4.3.3 and 5.1 inclusive
-
Verify remote login services are enabledCheck if telnet, rlogin, or ssh services are running using 'lsitab -a | grep -E "telnet|rlogin"' or 'netstat -an | grep -E "23|513"'Affected if Remote login services (telnet/rlogin) are active and accessible over the network
-
Test login failure message behaviorFrom a remote system, attempt to log in with a clearly invalid username, then attempt with a valid username but wrong password. Compare the exact error messages returned.Affected if The error messages differ between 'invalid username' and 'wrong password' scenarios, revealing which field was incorrect
-
Inspect login configuration fileExamine /etc/security/login.cfg for 'auth_type' settings and message configuration, or check PAM configuration if applicable using 'ls -la /etc/pam.conf'Affected if The configuration shows distinct failure messages are returned for username vs password errors, or no generic message is configured
You are affected if running AIX 4.3.3 through 5.1 with remote login enabled and the system returns different failure messages for invalid usernames versus incorrect passwords.
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 dataConfigure AIX to return identical authentication failure messages regardless of whether the username or password is incorrect, typically through modifications to /etc/security/login.cfg or the pam configuration.
- Consultation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2004-0243 — 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-2004-0243 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