CVE-2005-0038
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 · uneditedThe DNS implementation of PowerDNS 2.9.16 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a compressed DNS packet with a label length byte with an incorrect offset, which could trigger an infinite loop.
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 confidencePowerDNS versions 2.9.16 and earlier contain a vulnerability in their DNS packet parsing logic where a compressed DNS packet containing a label length byte with an incorrect offset can trigger an infinite loop, causing a denial of service condition.
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<= 2.9.16= 2.0_rc1= 2.8= 2.9.0= 2.9.1= 2.9.2= 2.9.3a= 2.9.4= 2.9.5= 2.9.6= 2.9.7= 2.9.8CVSS 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 PowerDNS installationRun 'pdns_control version' or check package manager (dpkg -l | grep pdns, rpm -qa | grep powerdns)Affected if PowerDNS is installed and version is 2.9.16 or earlier, or any of these specific versions: 2.0_rc1, 2.8, 2.9.0, 2.9.1, 2.9.2, 2.9.3a, 2.9.4, 2.9.5, 2.9.6, 2.9.7, 2.9.8
-
Verify PowerDNS service statusRun 'systemctl status pdns' or 'service pdns status' to confirm the daemon is runningAffected if The PowerDNS service is currently running
-
Check network exposureRun 'netstat -tulnp | grep :53' or 'ss -tulnp | grep :53' to see if PowerDNS is listening on DNS portsAffected if PowerDNS is listening on UDP/TCP port 53 and reachable from network
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 PowerDNS to a version newer than 2.9.16. If immediate upgrade is not possible, consider implementing DNS traffic filtering at the network perimeter to block malformed DNS packets.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-0038 — 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-2005-0038 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