CVE-2006-3552
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 · uneditedPremium Anti-Spam in Ipswitch IMail Secure Server 2006 and Collaboration Suite 2006 Premium, when using a certain .dat file in the StarEngine /data directory from 20060630 or earlier, does not properly receive and implement bullet signature updates, which allows context-dependent attackers to use the server for spam transmission.
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 confidenceThe Premium Anti-Spam feature in Ipswitch IMail Secure Server 2006 and Collaboration Suite 2006 Premium uses outdated signature database files (.dat) in the StarEngine /data directory from 20060630 or earlier. These legacy signature files fail to properly receive and implement bullet signature updates, allowing attackers to bypass the anti-spam controls and leverage the mail server for spam transmission.
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= 2006_premium= 2006_premiumCVSS 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N
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.
-
Verify Ipswitch IMail 2006 Premium edition is installedCheck system for Ipswitch IMail Secure Server 2006 or Ipswitch Collaboration Suite 2006 Premium installationAffected if The Premium edition is installed and the Premium Anti-Spam feature is in use
-
Locate the StarEngine data directoryNavigate to the StarEngine component installation path and locate the /data subdirectory containing .dat signature filesAffected if The StarEngine /data directory exists and contains .dat signature database files
-
Check signature file dateExamine the modification date of the .dat signature files in the StarEngine /data directoryAffected if The .dat files have a modification date of 20060630 or earlier
-
Confirm Premium Anti-Spam is enabledVerify the Premium Anti-Spam feature is actively enabled in the Ipswitch mail server configurationAffected if Premium Anti-Spam is enabled and using the outdated signature database
A user is affected if they run Ipswitch IMail Secure Server 2006 Premium or Collaboration Suite 2006 Premium with the Premium Anti-Spam feature enabled and the StarEngine signature database files dated 20060630 or earlier.
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 dataReplace the outdated .dat signature file in the StarEngine /data directory with a current version newer than 20060630 to restore proper signature update functionality and re-enable anti-spam protections.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-3552 — 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-2006-3552 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