CVE-2006-2230
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 format string vulnerabilities in xiTK (xitk/main.c) in xine 0.99.4 might allow attackers to cause a denial of service via format string specifiers in an MP3 filename specified on the command line. NOTE: this is a different vulnerability than CVE-2006-1905. In addition, if the only attack vectors involve a user-assisted, local command line argument of a non-setuid program, this issue might not be a vulnerability.
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 confidenceFormat string vulnerability in xine's xiTK library (xitk/main.c, version 0.99.4) where an MP3 filename provided as a command-line argument is passed directly to format string functions without sanitization, allowing attackers to inject format specifiers (e.g., %s, %x) to cause denial of service.
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= 0.99.4CVSS 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.
-
Check if xine is installedRun 'which xine' or 'xine --version' to see if the xine media player is present on the systemAffected if xine is installed and responds to version query
-
Identify the xine versionRun 'xine --version' and examine the output to determine the exact version numberAffected if The version reported is 0.99.4 specifically
-
Verify the xiTK library presenceCheck for the presence of the xitk library files (typically in /usr/lib or /usr/local/lib) that would be loaded by xineAffected if The xiTK library files exist and correspond to the 0.99.4 release
-
Confirm command-line filename usageRun 'xine --help' or 'xine --usage' to verify that xine accepts filenames as command-line arguments for playbackAffected if xine accepts filename arguments for playback (this is the standard behavior)
-
Check for format string vulnerability contextReview xine's main.c or xitk/main.c source code if available, looking for direct usage of user-supplied filenames in printf-style functions without %s argumentAffected if Code passes command-line filename directly to format functions like printf(filename) instead of printf("%s", filename)
You are affected if xine version 0.99.4 is installed and processes filenames from the command line without sanitization, as this specific version contains the format string vulnerability in the xiTK library.
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 dataSince this requires a user to supply a specially crafted filename as a command-line argument to a non-setuid media player, the practical risk is low. The fix involves sanitizing filenames or using proper argument passing (e.g., printf("%s", filename) instead of printf(filename)) before format string functions.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $1,904.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-2230 — 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-2006-2230 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