CVE-2006-0989
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 · uneditedStack-based buffer overflow in the volume manager daemon (vmd) in Veritas NetBackup Enterprise Server 5.0 through 6.0 and DataCenter and BusinesServer 4.5FP and 4.5MP allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via unknown vectors.
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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflow in the Veritas NetBackup volume manager daemon (vmd) allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code by overflowing a buffer on the stack. The vulnerability affects vmd in NetBackup Enterprise Server 5.0-6.0 and DataCenter/BusinessServer 4.5FP/4.5MP.
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= 4.5.0= 5.0= 5.1= 6.0CVSS 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
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
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 NetBackup installationCheck for NetBackup installation by looking for /usr/openv/netbackup or /opt/veritas/netbackup directories, or run: bpgetconfig 2>/dev/null | head -5Affected if NetBackup is not installed, the system is not affected by this CVE
-
Determine NetBackup versionRun command: bpgetconfig 2>/dev/null | grep -i version, or check /usr/openv/netbackup/version for version stringAffected if Version matches 4.5.0, 5.0, 5.1, or 6.0 - these specific versions are vulnerable
-
Confirm vmd daemon is runningRun: ps -ef | grep vmd or check with: /usr/openv/volmgr/bin/vmps -lAffected if vmd process is running - the vulnerable component is active
-
Check if vmd is listening on networkRun: netstat -an | grep vmd or: /usr/openv/volmgr/bin/tpconfig -d to see configured ports, check if port 10001 or similar vmd ports are in LISTEN state on 0.0.0.0Affected if vmd is bound to 0.0.0.0 or an external IP address - vulnerability is remotely exploitable
System is affected if NetBackup versions 4.5.0, 5.0, 5.1, or 6.0 are installed AND the vmd daemon is running and accessible on the network.
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 available patches from Veritas for this vulnerability, or upgrade to a patched/upported version of NetBackup. As a compensating control, restrict network access to the vmd service and segment affected systems.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,680.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-0989 — 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-2006-0989 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