FirefoxWeb browser · Mozilla
CVE-2006-6585
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 · uneditedThe Extensions manager in Mozilla Firefox 2.0 does not properly populate the list of local extensions, which allows attackers to construct an extension that hides itself by finding its name in the list and then calling RemoveElement, as demonstrated by the FFsniFF extension. NOTE: it was later reported that 3.0 is also affected.
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 confidenceThe Extensions manager in Mozilla Firefox 2.0 (and later reported in 3.0) does not properly populate the list of local extensions, allowing a malicious extension to hide itself by locating its name in the list and calling RemoveElement, as demonstrated by the FFsniFF extension.
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
FirefoxWeb browser
= 2.0= 3.0CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/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 Firefox versionOpen Firefox, click Help > About Firefox (or navigate to about:support) to view the installed version numberAffected if Version is 2.0 or 3.0 exactly (the affected versions)
-
Review installed extensionsOpen Firefox, navigate to Add-ons Manager (Tools > Add-ons or about:addons), review the list of installed extensions for any unknown or suspicious extensionsAffected if Any extension is present that was not intentionally installed, especially if it shows no author or has obfuscated details
-
Check extension list integrityIn the Firefox address bar, type about:support and look at the Extensions section - compare against what displays in Add-ons ManagerAffected if The extension list shown differs between about:support and Add-ons Manager (could indicate an extension has hidden itself)
-
Inspect extension manifest filesNavigate to the Firefox profile folder (about:support shows profile path), then to extensions/ subfolder, and examine folder names and contained manifest.json or install.rdf filesAffected if Any extension folder contains a manifest with unusual permissions or the extension has modified its own entry in extension list storage
You are affected if running Firefox 2.0 or 3.0 and have any extension installed that could potentially hide itself from the Add-ons Manager by manipulating the extensions list via RemoveElement.
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 dataUpdate Firefox to a version beyond 3.0 where this extension management vulnerability has been patched, and ensure extension signing and verification controls are enabled in modern Firefox versions.
Fix this in Firefox
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-6585 — 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-2006-6585 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