CVE-2006-4306
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 Sun Solaris 8 and 9 before 20060821 allows local users to execute arbitrary commands via unspecified vectors, involving the default Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) settings in the "File System Management" profile.
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 confidenceLocal privilege escalation vulnerability in Sun Solaris 8 and 9 involving default Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) settings in the 'File System Management' profile, allowing local users to execute arbitrary commands via unspecified vectors.
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= 8.0= 9.0= 5.8CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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 Solaris versionRun 'uname -a' or 'cat /etc/release' to determine if the system is Sun Solaris 8, 9, or SunOS 5.8Affected if The system is Sun Solaris 8.0, 9.0, or SunOS 5.8 (Sunos 5.8)
-
Verify RBAC is enabledCheck for the existence of /etc/security/profattr or run 'roleadm list' to see if RBAC is configuredAffected if RBAC is enabled and the File System Management profile exists on the system
-
Locate File System Management profileUse 'profattr' command or examine /etc/security/profattr to find the 'File System Management' profile definitionAffected if The File System Management profile exists in the RBAC configuration
-
Examine profile privilegesUse 'getprofattr' or review the profile's assigned authorizations and execute rights to determine what commands can be runAffected if The profile grants excessive privileges that could allow arbitrary command execution
-
Check for privileged user assignmentsUse 'usersadm list' or examine /etc/user_attr to see which users or roles are assigned the File System Management profileAffected if Regular user accounts have been assigned the File System Management profile or an associated role
A system is affected if it runs Solaris 8 or 9 (Sunos 5.8) with RBAC enabled and the File System Management profile present with elevated privileges accessible to local users.
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 dataReview and harden the File System Management RBAC profile to remove excessive privileges, restrict execution paths, and ensure least privilege principles are applied; consider upgrading to a patched Solaris version.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-4306 — 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-2006-4306 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