CVE-2005-3194
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 · uneditedMultiple buffer overflows in ALZip 6.12 (Korean), 6.1 (International), and 5.52 (English) allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long filename in a compressed (1) ALZ, (2) ARJ, (3) ZIP, (4) UUE, or (5) XXE archive.
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 confidenceBuffer overflow vulnerability in ALZip archive utilities (versions 5.52, 6.1, and 6.12) allows remote code execution via crafted archives containing excessively long filenames. The overflow occurs during parsing of ALZ, ARJ, ZIP, UUE, and XXE archive formats when the application processes filename metadata without proper bounds checking.
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= 5.52_english= 6.1_international= 6.12_koreanCVSS 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
- High
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:H/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.
-
Check if ALZip is installedLook for ALZip in the Windows registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall or check for the presence of alzip.exe in Program Files folders (e.g., C:\Program Files\ESTsoft\ALZip or C:\Program Files (x86)\ESTsoft\ALZip)Affected if ALZip software is found on the system
-
Identify the installed ALZip versionRight-click alzip.exe, select Properties, and view the Version tab; alternatively, check the Windows registry key under HKLM\SOFTWARE\ESTsoft\ALZip for the version valueAffected if The version displayed is 5.52_english, 6.1_international, or 6.12_korean
-
Determine if the application processes untrusted archivesReview how ALZip is used in your environment - check if it is set as a default handler for .alz, .zip, .arj, .uue, or .xxe files, or if users routinely open archive files from external or untrusted sourcesAffected if ALZip is used to open archives from untrusted or external sources, or is configured as a default archive handler for user-received files
The system is affected if ALZip version 5.52_english, 6.1_international, or 6.12_korean is installed and is used to process archive files from untrusted sources.
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 dataUpdate to a patched version if available; otherwise, implement input validation to reject archives with filenames exceeding expected maximum lengths before processing, and consider sandboxing or isolating ALZip when handling untrusted archives.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-3194 — 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-2005-3194 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