CVE-2004-2758
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 · uneditedMultiple unspecified vulnerabilities in the H.323 protocol implementation for Sun SunForum 3.2 and 3D 1.0 allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (segmentation fault and process crash), as demonstrated by the NISCC/OUSPG PROTOS test suite for the H.225 protocol.
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 confidenceMultiple unspecified vulnerabilities in the H.323 protocol implementation in Sun SunForum 3.2 and 3D 1.0 allow remote attackers to cause denial of service via malformed H.225 protocol packets, resulting in segmentation faults and process crashes.
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= 3.2= 3d_1.0CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/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.
-
Confirm SunForum installationCheck if Sun SunForum software is installed on the system. Look for the product in system inventory, installed packages, or application directories.Affected if SunForum version 3.2 or 3D 1.0 is installed and the version matches exactly (= 3.2 or = 3d_1.0)
-
Verify installed versionUse system package management tools or check the application's version information (about dialog, version file, or installer records) to determine the exact version number.Affected if The installed version is 3.2 or 3d_1.0 exactly as listed in affected versions
-
Determine if H.323 protocol is enabledCheck SunForum configuration settings, service settings, or conference room settings for H.323 protocol support. Look for H.225/H.323 related options or modules.Affected if H.323 protocol functionality is enabled in the SunForum configuration
-
Assess network exposureDetermine if the SunForum service is accessible from the network. Check firewall rules, service binding (listening on external interfaces), and whether conferencing ports are exposed.Affected if The SunForum service is accessible from network hosts who could send malformed H.225 packets
-
Check for recent process crashesReview system logs, application logs, and crash dumps for segmentation faults or unexpected process terminations related to the SunForum conferencing process.Affected if The system shows recent unexplained crashes of the SunForum process
A user is affected if SunForum version 3.2 or 3D 1.0 is installed, H.323 protocol is enabled, and the service is network-accessible to receive malicious H.225 packets.
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 dataApply vendor patches if available; if unsupported, disable H.323 protocol functionality or upgrade to a supported version. Consider network-level controls to restrict access to the conferencing service.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2004-2758 — 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-2004-2758 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