CVE-2004-0674
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 · uneditedEnterasys XSR-1800 series Security Routers, when running firmware 7.0.0.0 and using Policy-Based Routing, allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) via a packet with the IP record route option set.
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 confidenceEnterasys XSR-1800 series Security Routers running firmware 7.0.0.0 contain a denial of service vulnerability when Policy-Based Routing is enabled. Remote attackers can crash the router by sending packets with the IP Record Route (RR) option set, which triggers a fault in the Policy-Based Routing processing path.
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= 7.0.0.0= 7.0.0.0all versionsCVSS 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.
-
Identify the router modelLog into the router CLI or check the device inventory to confirm the hardware is an Enterasys XSR-1805, XSR-1850, or XSR-3000 series router.Affected if The device is not one of these specific models.
-
Check the firmware versionUse the router's CLI command to display the running firmware version (commonly 'show version' or 'show firmware'). Compare the version number against the affected ranges: XSR-1805 and XSR-1850 at version 7.0.0.0 specifically, or any version of XSR-3000.Affected if The firmware version is 7.0.0.0 on an XSR-1805 or XSR-1850, OR the device is an XSR-3000 at any version.
-
Verify Policy-Based Routing is enabledAccess the router configuration and check whether Policy-Based Routing (PBR) is actively configured and enabled on any interface or policy map. Use commands such as 'show running-config' or 'show ip policy' to review PBR settings.Affected if Policy-Based Routing is not enabled; the vulnerability only triggers when PBR is active.
-
Confirm IP Record Route option handling is activeCheck if the router is configured to process or inspect IP options on inbound packets, particularly the Record Route (RR) option. This may be visible in the PBR policy definitions or IP processing configuration.Affected if The router does not process packets with the IP RR option in its PBR path.
You are affected if you have an Enterasys XSR-1805 or XSR-1850 at firmware 7.0.0.0 (or any XSR-3000) with Policy-Based Routing enabled, and the router processes IP packets with the Record Route option through that PBR path.
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 a patched firmware version if available; alternatively, disable Policy-Based Routing if not required for operations. Consider filtering IP packets with the RR option at the network perimeter as a compensating control.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2004-0674 — 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-2004-0674 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