CVE-2005-4445
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 · uneditedOff-by-one error in Pegasus Mail 4.21a through 4.21c and 4.30PB1 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long email message header, which triggers a one-byte buffer overflow.
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 confidenceOff-by-one buffer overflow in Pegasus Mail versions 4.21a-4.21c and 4.30PB1 when processing email message headers. A long email header triggers a one-byte overflow that can be exploited for remote arbitrary code execution.
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= 4.21a= 4.21b= 4.21c= 4.30pb1CVSS 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.
-
Verify Pegasus Mail is installedCheck for Pegasus Mail installation directory (commonly C:\Program Files\Pegasus Mail or C:\Program Files (x86)\Pegasus Mail) or search for pmail.exe executable on the system.Affected if Pegasus Mail executable is found on the system
-
Determine installed Pegasus Mail versionRight-click on pmail.exe, select Properties, and check the Version tab for the product version. Alternatively, launch Pegasus Mail and check Help > About Pegasus Mail for the version number.Affected if Installed version matches 4.21a, 4.21b, 4.21c, or 4.30pb1 exactly
-
Confirm email processing is enabledPegasus Mail must have at least one mail account configured and be set to receive or view email messages. Check if any mail accounts exist in the Pegasus Mail configuration.Affected if The client has mail accounts configured and can receive or display email messages containing headers
The system is affected if Pegasus Mail version 4.21a, 4.21b, 4.21c, or 4.30pb1 is installed and configured to process incoming email messages.
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 dataApply any available vendor patch for Pegasus Mail; alternatively, implement email gateway filtering to sanitize or reject oversized email headers before delivery to client systems.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-4445 — 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-2005-4445 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