CVE-2005-3140
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 · uneditedProcom NetFORCE 800 4.02 M10 Build 20 and possibly other versions sends the NIS password map (passwd.nis) as a file attachment in diagnostic e-mail messages, which allows remote attackers to obtain the cleartext NIS password hashes.
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 confidenceThe Procom NetFORCE 800 4.02 M10 Build 20 device has a diagnostic email feature that sends the NIS password map (passwd.nis) as a file attachment. This exposes password hashes to anyone receiving these diagnostic messages, enabling offline password cracking 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= 4.02CVSS 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
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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.
-
Identify the device modelAccess the device admin interface or check the device label/documentation to confirm it is a Procom NetFORCE 800 deviceAffected if The device is not a Procom NetFORCE 800 (not affected)
-
Check the firmware versionAccess the device admin interface or use SNMP/CLI to query the firmware version. Common paths include the web UI status page or 'show version' command via console/SSHAffected if The firmware version is exactly 4.02 (affected). Versions other than 4.02 are not within the specific affected range.
-
Locate the diagnostic email configurationNavigate to the device web admin interface or configuration files. Look for settings labeled 'Diagnostic Email', 'Email Diagnostics', or similar under System or Administration menusAffected if The diagnostic email feature exists and is configurable on this device
-
Determine if diagnostic email is enabledIn the device admin interface, check whether the diagnostic email feature is turned on or scheduled. If using CLI, look for email-related configuration entriesAffected if Diagnostic email is enabled and configured to send (vulnerable condition)
-
Verify passwd.nis file existenceCheck if the file 'passwd.nis' exists in the device filesystem or is accessible via FTP/SCP if these services are enabledAffected if The passwd.nis file is present on the device (exposed file exists)
You are affected if you have a Procom NetFORCE 800 running firmware version 4.02 with the diagnostic email feature enabled, as this configuration sends password hash files to email recipients.
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 dataDisable the diagnostic email feature if possible, or upgrade to a patched version. Network isolation of the device can limit exposure to untrusted recipients.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,744.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-3140 — 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-2005-3140 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