CVE-2006-2240
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 · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in the (1) web cache or (2) web proxy in Fujitsu NetShelter/FW allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device unresponsiveness) via certain DNS packets, as demonstrated by the OUSPG PROTOS DNS test suite.
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 confidenceFujitsu NetShelter/FW web cache and web proxy components contain an unspecified vulnerability allowing remote attackers to cause denial of service via crafted DNS packets. The PROTOS DNS test suite demonstrated that certain DNS packet sequences trigger device unresponsiveness, likely due to improper handling of malformed or unexpected DNS query types in the proxy/cache processing path.
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 dataall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsCVSS 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 appliance modelCheck the system hostname, banner, or management interface for 'Fujitsu NetShelter' or 'Netshelter' identifiers. Review hardware labeling or purchase documentation.Affected if The appliance is a Fujitsu NetShelter Fw, Fw L, Fw M, or Fw P model.
-
Confirm web cache or proxy component is activeLog into the appliance management console or CLI. Look for web cache or proxy service status, typically found under Services, Proxy, or Cache configuration sections.Affected if The web cache component or web proxy service is enabled and running on the appliance.
-
Verify DNS proxy handling is enabledExamine the DNS proxy or DNS forwarding settings in the appliance configuration. This is often under DNS settings, Proxy settings, or Network services.Affected if The appliance is configured to handle DNS queries or perform DNS proxy functions for clients or network traffic.
-
Review recent device responsivenessCheck system logs for sudden crashes, restarts, or 'unresponsive' events. Test basic connectivity (ping, HTTP) to the appliance after sending DNS query traffic.Affected if The device has become unresponsive following DNS traffic, or logs show DNS-related errors or service interruptions.
If the device is a Fujitsu NetShelter Fw variant with web cache or proxy enabled and handling DNS queries, it is likely affected by this vulnerability.
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 vendor patches for Fujitsu NetShelter/FW; if patches are unavailable, implement network-level filtering of unusual DNS traffic destined for the appliance as a compensating control.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-2240 — 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-2006-2240 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