CVE-2006-1137
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 · uneditedMultiple unspecified vulnerabilities in Xerox CopyCentre and Xerox WorkCentre Pro, running software 1.001.02.073 or earlier, or 1.001.02.074 before 1.001.02.715, allow remote attackers to cause an unspecified denial of service via a crafted PostScript file that will (1) "navigate through the directory" or (2) a "file sent to expose TCP/IP ports".
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 confidenceMultiple vulnerabilities in Xerox CopyCentre and WorkCentre Pro devices running software versions 1.001.02.073 or earlier, or 1.001.02.074 before 1.001.02.715, allow remote attackers to cause denial of service via crafted PostScript files. The vulnerabilities enable directory traversal and exposure of TCP/IP ports.
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, < 1.001.02.715<= 1.001.02.073>= 1.001.02.074, < 1.001.02.715<= 1.001.02.073>= 1.001.02.074, < 1.001.02.715<= 1.001.02.073>= 1.001.02.074, < 1.001.02.715<= 1.001.02.073>= 1.001.02.074, < 1.001.02.715<= 1.001.02.073>= 1.001.02.074, < 1.001.02.715CVSS 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 modelLocate the device label or check the web interface for the model name (CopyCentre C65/C75/C90 or WorkCentre Pro 65/75/90)Affected if The device is a Xerox CopyCentre C65, C75, C90, WorkCentre Pro 65, 75, or 90
-
Determine the installed firmware versionAccess the device admin panel or print a configuration page to view the firmware versionAffected if The firmware version is 1.001.02.073 or earlier, OR between 1.001.02.074 and 1.001.02.714
-
Verify if PostScript printing is enabledCheck the device print services or job configuration settings for PostScript supportAffected if PostScript processing is enabled on the device
-
Review exposed network servicesScan the device IP address for open TCP/IP ports using a network scannerAffected if The device has unusual TCP ports exposed to the network
The environment is affected if the device is a Xerox CopyCentre or WorkCentre Pro model listed above with firmware version 1.001.02.073 or earlier, or any version from 1.001.02.074 through 1.001.02.714, and PostScript processing is 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 data1.001.02.715
Update Xerox device firmware to version 1.001.02.715 or later. If updates are unavailable due to device age, consider network segmentation and disabling unnecessary services.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-1137 — 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-2006-1137 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