CVE-2004-1428
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 · uneditedArGoSoft FTP before 1.4.2.1 generates an error message if the user name does not exist instead of prompting for a password, which allows remote attackers to determine valid usernames.
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 confidenceArGoSoft FTP server versions prior to 1.4.2.1 exhibit a username enumeration vulnerability. When a user attempts authentication with a non-existent username, the server returns an error immediately rather than prompting for a password. This inconsistent response allows remote attackers to probe the server and determine which usernames are valid by observing the different error responses.
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< 1.4.2.1CVSS 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 if ArGoSoft FTP Server is presentCheck running processes for 'ArGoSoft' or scan for FTP service on port 21. On Windows, check installed programs list or services.msc for ArGoSoft FTP Server.Affected if ArGoSoft FTP Server is found running or installed on the system
-
Determine installed version of ArGoSoft FTP ServerLocate the ArGoSoft FTP executable (typically argoftp.exe or similar in the installation directory), right-click and select Properties, then check the Details tab for File Version. Alternatively, check the application's About or Help section within the software.Affected if Version is detected as below 1.4.2.1 (for example, 1.4.2.0, 1.4.1.x, or any earlier version)
-
Test authentication response behavior for invalid usernamesConnect to the FTP server using a client (like command-line ftp or any FTP client). Attempt to log in with a clearly invalid username such as 'thisuserdefinitelydoesnotexist' and observe the server response. Note whether it immediately returns an error message or prompts for a password.Affected if Server returns an error message immediately (such as 'User cannot log in' or 'Invalid username') without prompting for password when using a non-existent username, indicating the enumeration vulnerability is present
You are affected if ArGoSoft FTP Server version below 1.4.2.1 is installed and the server returns an immediate error for invalid usernames instead of prompting for password, allowing username enumeration.
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 data1.4.2.1
Upgrade ArGoSoft FTP server to version 1.4.2.1 or later, which implements consistent authentication behavior (prompting for password regardless of username validity). If upgrade is not possible, consider implementing a front-end authentication proxy that provides uniform responses.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2004-1428 — 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-2004-1428 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