CVE-2005-3249
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 · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in the WSP dissector in Ethereal 0.10.1 to 0.10.12 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service or corrupt memory via unknown vectors that cause Ethereal to free an invalid pointer.
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 confidenceA memory corruption vulnerability exists in the WSP (Wireless Session Protocol) dissector of Ethereal versions 0.10.1 through 0.10.12. The vulnerability allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service or corrupt heap memory by triggering the application to free an invalid pointer during packet dissection.
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= 0.10.1= 0.10.2= 0.10.3= 0.10.4= 0.10.5= 0.10.6= 0.10.7= 0.10.8= 0.10.9= 0.10.10= 0.10.11= 0.10.12CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/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 Ethereal is installedRun 'ethereal -v' or 'which ethereal' to see if the application exists on the systemAffected if Ethereal is installed and the version is between 0.10.1 and 0.10.12 inclusive
-
Verify the exact Ethereal versionRun 'ethereal -v' and look at the version number in the outputAffected if The version displayed is 0.10.1, 0.10.2, 0.10.3, 0.10.4, 0.10.5, 0.10.6, 0.10.7, 0.10.8, 0.10.9, 0.10.10, 0.10.11, or 0.10.12
-
Confirm WSP dissector availabilityCheck if WSP dissector is present: look in Ethereal's 'Analyze > Enabled Protocols' or check for wsp dissector files in the installation directoryAffected if WSP dissector is enabled and available for dissecting packet captures
You are affected if Ethereal version 0.10.1 through 0.10.12 is installed and the WSP dissector is enabled or can be used to dissect capture files.
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 Ethereal/Wireshark to a version beyond 0.10.12, or apply the vendor patch for this specific WSP dissector vulnerability. Until patched, exercise caution when dissecting capture files from untrusted sources.
- Consultation1.0 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 $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-3249 — 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-2005-3249 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