CVE-2006-1136
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 · uneditedBuffer overflow in the PostScript file interpreter code for Xerox CopyCentre and Xerox WorkCentre Pro, running software 1.001.02.073 or earlier, or 1.001.02.074 before 1.001.02.715, allows attackers to cause a denial of service 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 confidenceBuffer overflow vulnerability in the PostScript file interpreter in Xerox CopyCentre and Xerox WorkCentre Pro multifunction devices running software versions 1.001.02.073 or earlier, or version 1.001.02.074 prior to 1.001.02.715. Attackers can cause denial of service via specially crafted PostScript files sent to the device.
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<= 1.001.02.073>= 1.001.02.074, < 1.001.02.0715<= 1.001.02.073>= 1.001.02.074, < 1.001.02.0715<= 1.001.02.073>= 1.001.02.074, < 1.001.02.0715<= 1.001.02.073>= 1.001.02.074, < 1.001.02.0715<= 1.001.02.073>= 1.001.02.074, < 1.001.02.0715<= 1.001.02.073>= 1.001.02.074, < 1.001.02.0715CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/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 the Xerox device modelAccess the device web interface, front panel system information, or print a configuration page to confirm the exact model (CopyCentre C65/C75/C90 or WorkCentre 65/75/90)Affected if Device is NOT one of: CopyCentre C65, CopyCentre C75, CopyCentre C90, WorkCentre 65, WorkCentre 75, WorkCentre 90
-
Check the installed software versionView the firmware/software version through the device web interface (System or About page), front panel menu under System Information, or by printing a configuration/status pageAffected if Version is 1.001.02.073 or earlier, OR between 1.001.02.074 and 1.001.02.714 inclusive
-
Confirm PostScript processing is enabledAccess the device configuration settings via web interface or front panel and verify if PostScript language support is turned on in the printing or language settingsAffected if PostScript processing is enabled and the device version falls within the affected ranges
The device is affected if it is a Xerox CopyCentre or WorkCentre model (C65/C75/C90 or 65/75/90) running software version 1.001.02.073 or earlier, or version 1.001.02.074 through 1.001.02.714, with PostScript processing enabled.
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 data1.001.02.0715
Update Xerox device firmware to version 1.001.02.715 or later. If patching is not immediately feasible, restrict unauthenticated access to device network services and disable PostScript processing if not required.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-1136 — 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-2006-1136 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