CVE-2005-4418
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 · uneditedutil-vserver before 0.30.208-1 with kernel-patch-vserver before 1.9.5.5 and 2.x before 2.3 for Debian GNU/Linux sets a default policy that trusts unknown capabilities, which could allow local users to conduct unauthorized activities.
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 util-vserver and kernel-patch-vserver packages for Debian GNU/Linux ship with a default security policy that trusts unknown capabilities. This overly permissive default configuration allows local users within the virtual server environment to potentially exercise capabilities that should be restricted, leading to unauthorized activities.
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= 0.30.209CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/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 util-vserver package is installedRun 'dpkg -l util-vserver' on Debian-based systems or 'rpm -q util-vserver' on RPM-based systems to see if the package is presentAffected if The package is installed with version 0.30.209 or lower
-
Check if kernel-patch-vserver package is installedRun 'dpkg -l kernel-patch-vserver' or 'rpm -q kernel-patch-vserver' to identify the installed version of the kernel vserver patch packageAffected if The package is installed with version below 1.9.5.5 or a 2.x version below 2.3
-
Locate the capability policy configuration fileLook for vserver security policy files typically found under /etc/vservers/ or /var/lib/vservers/ directories, or check for files named 'policy' or 'capability' within the vserver configurationAffected if A policy file exists that contains settings related to capability handling
-
Inspect the capability policy for unknown capability trustExamine the policy configuration file for settings such as 'unknown' or 'default' capability handling, looking for entries that explicitly allow or trust unknown capabilities (for example, lines containing 'unknown = allow' or similar permissive defaults)Affected if The policy file contains a permissive configuration that trusts or allows unknown capabilities rather than denying them explicitly
A system is affected if it runs any version of util-vserver at or below 0.30.209 or kernel-patch-vserver below 1.9.5.5 (or 2.x below 2.3) AND has a capability policy configured to trust unknown capabilities by default.
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 util-vserver to version 0.30.208-1 or later, and kernel-patch-vserver to version 1.9.5.5 or later (or 2.x series to version 2.3 or later). Review and tighten the capability policy to explicitly deny unknown capabilities rather than trusting them by default.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-4418 — 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-2005-4418 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