Anomaly Guard ModuleHardware / appliance · Cisco
CVE-2006-0764
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 Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting (AAA) capability in versions 5.0(1) and 5.0(3) of the software used by multiple Cisco Anomaly Detection and Mitigation products, when running with an incomplete TACACS+ configuration without a "tacacs-server host" command, allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and gain privileges, aka Bug ID CSCsd21455.
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 AAA (Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting) capability in Cisco Anomaly Detection and Mitigation software versions 5.0(1) and 5.0(3) contains an authentication bypass vulnerability when TACACS+ is configured incompletely—specifically when the 'tacacs-server host' command is missing. This configuration error allows remote attackers to bypass authentication entirely and gain administrative privileges.
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
Anomaly Guard ModuleHardware / appliance
= 5.0\(1\)= 5.0\(3\)
GuardHardware / appliance
= 5.0\(1\)= 5.0\(3\)
Traffic Anomaly Detector ModuleHardware / appliance
= 5.0\(1\)= 5.0\(3\)CVSS 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.
-
Identify product and versionRun 'show version' on the device CLI to determine if the software version is 5.0(1) or 5.0(3)Affected if Version is 5.0(1) or 5.0(3)
-
Check TACACS+ configuration stateRun 'show running-config | include tacacs' to examine the current TACACS+ configurationAffected if TACACS configuration commands are present in the config
-
Verify tacacs-server host presenceRun 'show running-config | include tacacs-server host' to check if any TACACS server host is definedAffected if The 'tacacs-server host' command is missing but other TACACS configuration exists (such as tacacs-server key)
-
Confirm authentication behaviorAttempt to access the administrative interface or run 'show user' to observe login behavior when TACACS is configured without a hostAffected if Authentication succeeds without credentials or uses fallback behavior that bypasses proper validation
The environment is affected if running Cisco Anomaly Detection and Mitigation version 5.0(1) or 5.0(3) with TACACS+ partially configured (tacacs-server key present but no tacacs-server host defined), allowing unauthenticated administrative access.
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 dataEnsure TACACS+ is properly configured with the 'tacacs-server host' command, or if TACACS+ is not in use, verify that fallback authentication mechanisms are appropriately secured with strong local credentials.
Fix this in Anomaly Guard Module
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-0764 — 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-2006-0764 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