Kernel Patch VserverApplication · Debian
CVE-2005-4347
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 · uneditedThe Linux 2.4 kernel patch in kernel-patch-vserver before 1.9.5.5 and 2.x before 2.3 for Debian GNU/Linux does not correctly set the "chroot barrier" with util-vserver, which allows attackers to access files on the host system that are outside of the vserver.
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 kernel-patch-vserver package for Debian GNU/Linux fails to correctly set the 'chroot barrier' when using util-vserver. This security flaw allows attackers inside a vserver guest to escape the chroot isolation and access files on the host system that should be outside the virtual server's root filesystem.
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
Kernel Patch VserverApplication
< 1.9.5.5>= 2.0, < 2.2
Debian LinuxOperating system
= 3.0= 3.1CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/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.
-
Check if kernel-patch-vserver package is installedRun `dpkg -l | grep kernel-patch-vserver` or `apt list --installed 2>/dev/null | grep kernel-patch-vserver`Affected if The package is installed and the version displays in the output
-
Identify the installed version of kernel-patch-vserverRun `dpkg -l kernel-patch-vserver` and note the version number shown in the output (format: 1.9.x.x or 2.x.x)Affected if The version number is less than 1.9.5.5, or greater than or equal to 2.0 but less than 2.2
-
Check if util-vserver is installedRun `dpkg -l util-vserver` or `which vserver` to see if the util-vserver tools are presentAffected if util-vserver is installed and available on the system
-
Determine if the system is running as a vserver guestRun `cat /proc/virtual` or check for `/proc/virtu` and review the output for vserver-related informationAffected if The system is a Linux-VServer guest and uses the vulnerable kernel-patch-vserver version
-
Verify the Debian release versionRun `cat /etc/debian_version` to confirm the system is Debian 3.0 (woody) or Debian 3.1 (sarge)Affected if The system runs Debian 3.0 or 3.1 and has kernel-patch-vserver installed
A system is affected if it has kernel-patch-vserver version 1.9.5.4 or earlier, or version 2.0 through 2.1.x installed, AND uses util-vserver in a vserver guest context.
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 data1.9.5.52.2
Upgrade kernel-patch-vserver to version 1.9.5.5 or later (for 1.x branch) or 2.3 or later (for 2.x branch), or migrate to modern container/isolation technologies as Linux-VServer is obsolete.
Fix this in Kernel Patch Vserver
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-4347 — 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-2005-4347 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