CVE-2006-0549
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 · uneditedSQL injection vulnerability in the SYS.DBMS_METADATA_UTIL package in Oracle Database 10g, and possibly earlier versions, might allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via unknown vectors. NOTE: due to the lack of relevant details from the Oracle advisory, a separate CVE is being created since it cannot be conclusively proven that this issue has been addressed by Oracle. It is possible that this is the same issue as Oracle Vuln# DB05 from the January 2006 CPU, in which case this would be subsumed by CVE-2006-0260. However, there are some inconsistencies that make this unclear, and there is also a possibility that this is related to DB06, which is subsumed by CVE-2006-0259.
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 confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in Oracle Database 10g's SYS.DBMS_METADATA_UTIL package allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via unknown vectors. This flaw exists in the metadata utility package accessible through the SYS schema.
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= 10.1.0.5CVSS 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 Oracle Database versionConnect to the database as SYSDBA and run: SELECT VERSION FROM V$INSTANCE;Affected if VERSION equals 10.1.0.5
-
Verify DBMS_METADATA_UTIL package existsQuery the data dictionary: SELECT OBJECT_NAME FROM DBA_OBJECTS WHERE OBJECT_NAME = 'DBMS_METADATA_UTIL' AND OWNER = 'SYS' AND OBJECT_TYPE = 'PACKAGE';Affected if The package exists in the SYS schema
-
Check privileges on the vulnerable packageQuery: SELECT GRANTEE, PRIVILEGE FROM DBA_TAB_PRIVS WHERE OWNER = 'SYS' AND TABLE_NAME = 'DBMS_METADATA_UTIL';Affected if The package is granted to PUBLIC or to application users beyond necessary DBA accounts
-
Verify network accessibilityCheck if the Oracle listener is exposed to untrusted networks. Review LISTENER.ORA for authorized hosts and firewall rules controlling access to port 1521.Affected if The database listener accepts connections from untrusted or external network segments
A user is affected if running Oracle Database 10.1.0.5 with the DBMS_METADATA_UTIL package accessible to non-privileged users over accessible network interfaces.
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 Oracle Critical Patch Update January 2006 or later; alternatively, restrict network access to the database and audit/revoke unnecessary privileges on the DBMS_METADATA_UTIL package.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 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 $4,464.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-0549 — 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-2006-0549 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