CVE-2006-1385
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 parseTaggedData function in WavePacket.mm in KisMAC R54 through R73p allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via multiple SSIDs in a Cisco vendor tag in a 802.11 management frame.
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 confidenceKisMAC versions R54 through R73p contain a stack-based buffer overflow in the parseTaggedData function in WavePacket.mm. The vulnerability is triggered when parsing 802.11 management frames containing Cisco vendor-specific tags with multiple SSIDs, allowing remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via specially crafted wireless frames.
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= 0.1a= 0.1b= 0.1c= 0.2a= 0.5d= 0.5d4= 0.10a= 0.11a= 0.12aCVSS 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.
-
Locate KisMAC installationSearch for KisMAC application on the system: on macOS, check /Applications folder or use 'ls /Applications | grep -i kismac' in Terminal. Also check ~/Applications and common installation paths.Affected if KisMAC application is found on the system
-
Identify installed KisMAC versionRight-click KisMAC.app > Get Info, or run 'defaults read /Applications/KisMAC.app/Contents/Info CFBundleVersion' in Terminal to obtain the exact version number.Affected if Version number matches R54 through R73p, OR equals 0.1a, 0.1b, 0.1c, 0.2a, 0.5d, 0.5d4, 0.10a, 0.11a, or 0.12a
-
Verify active wireless capture modeLaunch KisMAC and check if passive scanning or active injection modes are enabled. Look for the 'Start Scan' button or similar capture controls in the GUI.Affected if KisMAC is actively scanning or injecting packets, which triggers the parseTaggedData function in WavePacket.mm
-
Inspect network interface configurationRun 'ifconfig' or check KisMAC's interface selection to confirm a wireless interface (en0, en1, etc.) is selected for capture.Affected if A wireless interface is actively selected for packet capture in KisMAC
A system is affected if it runs KisMAC versions R54-R73p or the specific older versions, and has active wireless capture enabled that processes 802.11 management frames.
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 dataUsers should upgrade to a patched version of KisMAC if available, or migrate to alternative wireless discovery tools as KisMAC development appears to have ceased. Network defenders can also mitigate by filtering unexpected vendor-specific tags at wireless infrastructure level.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-1385 — 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-2006-1385 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