CVE-2005-2794
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 · uneditedstore.c in Squid 2.5.STABLE10 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) via certain aborted requests that trigger an assert error related to STORE_PENDING.
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 confidenceSquid 2.5.STABLE10 and earlier contains a denial of service vulnerability in store.c where certain aborted requests trigger an assertion error related to the STORE_PENDING state management. The vulnerability allows remote attackers to crash the Squid proxy server by sending specially crafted aborted requests that cause the store subsystem to fail an assertion check.
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= 2.0.patch1= 2.0.patch2= 2.0.pre1= 2.0.release= 2.1.patch1= 2.1.patch2= 2.1.pre1= 2.1.pre3= 2.1.pre4= 2.1.release= 2.2.devel3= 2.2.devel4CVSS 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.
-
Verify Squid is installedRun 'squid -v' or check for /usr/sbin/squid binaryAffected if Squid is not installed on the system
-
Determine installed Squid versionRun 'squid -v' and note the version string (e.g., 2.5.STABLE10, 2.5.STABLE9, etc.)Affected if Version is 2.5.STABLE10 or earlier, or matches 2.0.x, 2.1.x, or 2.2.x patterns listed in affected versions
-
Confirm the store subsystem is in useCheck Squid configuration for any active caching directives (http_port, cache_dir, or any store-* directives in squid.conf)Affected if Squid is configured and running as a caching proxy - the store.c code path is always active in standard proxy configurations
-
Verify Squid is actively runningRun 'ps aux | grep squid' or check service statusAffected if Squid process is running - only running instances can be crashed via this denial of service
The system is affected if Squid is installed with a version between 2.0 and 2.5.STABLE10 inclusive, and the Squid service is actively running as a proxy server.
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 to a patched Squid version beyond 2.5.STABLE10, or apply the vendor patch for store.c that corrects STORE_PENDING state handling for aborted requests.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-2794 — 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-2005-2794 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