CVE-2006-6173
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 · uneditedBuffer overflow in the shared_region_make_private_np function in vm/vm_unix.c in Mac OS X 10.4.6 and earlier allows local users to execute arbitrary code via (1) a small range count, which causes insufficient memory allocation, or (2) a large number of ranges in the shared_region_make_private_np_args parameter.
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 confidenceBuffer overflow in Mac OS X kernel's vm_unix.c shared_region_make_private_np function allows local privilege escalation via insufficient memory allocation when range count is too small or when too many ranges are passed in shared_region_make_private_np_args.
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<= 10.4.6CVSS 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 Mac OS X versionRun 'sw_vers -productVersion' or check System Preferences > About to determine the installed Mac OS X versionAffected if version is 10.4.6 or earlier (any version up to and including 10.4.6)
-
Confirm kernel versionRun 'uname -r' to check the kernel version; kernel versions for 10.4.x typically start with 8.xAffected if kernel version corresponds to Mac OS X 10.4.6 or earlier
-
Check for the vulnerable system callThe shared_region_make_private_np system call is present in the vulnerable vm_unix.c kernel code; verify kernel is from affected OS version by cross-referencing 'uname -a' output with Apple security knowledge base for 10.4.6 and earlierAffected if system is running any Mac OS X 10.4.x release up to and including 10.4.6
A system is affected if it is running Mac OS X version 10.4.6 or any earlier 10.4.x release, as the vulnerable shared_region_make_private_np function in vm_unix.c is present in those versions.
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 Apple security updates for Mac OS X 10.4.x; restrict local untrusted user access to systems running vulnerable OS versions.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing24.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $15,232.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-6173 — 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-2006-6173 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