CVE-2005-1308
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 · uneditedSqWebMail allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via CRLF sequences in the redirect parameter followed by the desired script or HTML.
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 confidenceSqWebMail contains a CRLF injection vulnerability in its redirect parameter. Attackers can inject CRLF sequences (carriage return + line feed) followed by arbitrary web script or HTML, enabling cross-site scripting (XSS) or HTTP response splitting attacks.
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= 3.4.1= 3.5.0= 3.5.1= 3.5.2= 3.5.3= 3.6.0= 3.6.1= 4.0.4_2004-05-24= 4.0.5CVSS 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.
-
Locate SqWebMail installationSearch for sqwebmail binary or check common installation directories such as /usr/local/sqwebmail, /var/www/sqwebmail, or use 'which sqwebmail' and 'rpm -qa | grep sqwebmail' or 'dpkg -l | grep sqwebmail' depending on your package managerAffected if SqWebMail is installed on the system
-
Determine installed versionRun 'sqwebmail -v' or check the package version via 'rpm -q sqwebmail' or 'dpkg -s sqwebmail', or inspect version files in the installation directoryAffected if Version matches any of these: 3.4.1, 3.5.0, 3.5.1, 3.5.2, 3.5.3, 3.6.0, 3.6.1, 4.0.4_2004-05-24, or 4.0.5
-
Verify web interface is enabledCheck if the SqWebMail HTTP daemon is running, typically on ports 80, 443, or 2000; inspect init scripts or process list for sqwebmail or httpd/sqwebmail related processesAffected if The SqWebMail web interface is accessible over the network
-
Test redirect parameter for CRLF injectionSend an HTTP request to the SqWebMail login page with a crafted redirect parameter containing CRLF sequences, such as 'redirect=%0D%0A<script>alert(1)</script>' and observe if the response reflects the injection or splits the HTTP headersAffected if The redirect parameter reflects unfiltered CRLF sequences or allows HTTP response splitting
You are affected if SqWebMail versions 3.4.1 through 4.0.5 are installed and the web interface is accessible, allowing the redirect parameter to accept unsanitized input.
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 dataImplement strict input validation on the redirect parameter to filter or encode CRLF sequences (0x0D and 0x0A characters). Validate that the redirect URL is within an allowlist of permitted domains or paths.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,848.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-1308 — 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-2005-1308 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