CVE-2006-4128
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 heap-based buffer overflows in Symantec VERITAS Backup Exec for Netware Server Remote Agent for Windows Server 9.1 and 9.2 (all builds), Backup Exec Continuous Protection Server Remote Agent for Windows Server 10.1 (builds 10.1.325.6301, 10.1.326.1401, 10.1.326.2501, 10.1.326.3301, and 10.1.327.401), and Backup Exec for Windows Server and Remote Agent 9.1 (build 9.1.4691), 10.0 (builds 10.0.5484 and 10.0.5520), and 10.1 (build 10.1.5629) allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) and possibly execute arbitrary code via a crafted RPC message.
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 confidenceHeap-based buffer overflow vulnerabilities in Symantec VERITAS Backup Exec Remote Agents for Windows Server allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause denial of service via crafted RPC messages. The vulnerability affects multiple versions and builds across Backup Exec for Netware, Continuous Protection Server, and Windows Server product lines.
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= 9.1= 9.1_build9.1.4691= 9.2= 10.0= 10.0_build10.0.5484= 10.0_build10.0.5520= 10.1= 10.1.325.6301= 10.1.326.1401= 10.1.326.2501= 10.1.326.3301= 10.1.327.401CVSS 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
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/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.
-
Identify if Backup Exec is installedCheck Windows registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Symantec\Backup Exec\Install or look for installation directory at C:\Program Files\Symantec\Backup ExecAffected if Backup Exec software is found on the system
-
Determine the installed Backup Exec versionQuery the registry key HKLM\SOFTWARE\Symantec\Backup Exec\Install\Version or check the About dialog in the Backup Exec consoleAffected if Version matches 9.1, 9.2, 10.0, or 10.1 (including specific builds 9.1.4691, 10.0.5484, 10.0.5520, 10.1.325.6301, 10.1.326.1401, 10.1.326.2501, 10.1.326.3301, or 10.1.327.401)
-
Verify the Remote Agent for Windows Server is enabledCheck Windows services for 'Backup Exec Remote Agent for Windows' (beremote) or examine the Backup Exec agent configuration settingsAffected if The Remote Agent service is installed and running
-
Confirm RPC listener exposureRun 'netsh rpc filter show filter' or check if TCP port 6106 (default beremote port) is listening and accessible from the networkAffected if The Remote Agent RPC service is listening on a network-exposed port
The system is affected if Backup Exec versions 9.1 through 10.1 are installed with the Remote Agent for Windows service enabled and exposed to network RPC requests.
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 dataUpgrade to supported versions of Backup Exec or apply vendor-supplied patches. If the affected products are end-of-life, migrate to a supported backup solution and implement network segmentation to limit exposure to the RPC service.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-4128 — 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-2006-4128 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