CVE-2005-0938
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 · uneditedUblog Reload 1.0 through 1.0.4 stores ublogreload.mdb under the web root, which allows remote attackers to read usernames and hashed passwords via a direct request to ublogreload.mdb.
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 confidenceUblog Reload 1.0-1.0.4 stores its Access database file (ublogreload.mdb) within the web root directory, making it directly downloadable via HTTP. An attacker can request this file and obtain usernames and password hashes stored in the database.
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= 1.0= 1.0.1= 1.0.2= 1.0.3= 1.0.4CVSS 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.
-
Confirm Ublog Reload installationLook for Ublog Reload application files in the web server's document root or application directory. Common locations include /var/www/html/, /www/, or C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\Affected if Ublog Reload version 1.0, 1.0.1, 1.0.2, 1.0.3, or 1.0.4 is installed
-
Identify installed versionCheck for version information in any configuration files, readme files, or the application's main PHP/ASP files. Look for version strings like '1.0', '1.0.1', etc.Affected if Installed version is 1.0 through 1.0.4 inclusive
-
Locate database fileSearch for ublogreload.mdb file within the web root directory structure. Check the application's directory and subdirectories.Affected if ublogreload.mdb file exists within the web-accessible directory tree
-
Test HTTP access to databaseAttempt to request http://[host]/ublogreload.mdb or the corresponding path via web browser or curl commandAffected if The .mdb file is downloadable and returns a response with file content (Content-Type will be application/x-msaccess or similar)
If Ublog Reload version 1.0-1.0.4 is installed AND ublogreload.mdb exists in a web-accessible directory AND the file can be downloaded via HTTP, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 dataMove ublogreload.mdb outside the web root directory and update the application's database connection path accordingly; alternatively, configure the web server to deny direct access to .mdb files.
- 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-2005-0938 — 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-2005-0938 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