CVE-2006-6707
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 · uneditedStack-based buffer overflow in the NeoTraceExplorer.NeoTraceLoader ActiveX control (NeoTraceExplorer.dll) in NeoTrace Express 3.25 and NeoTrace Pro (aka McAfee Visual Trace) 3.25 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long argument string to the TraceTarget method. NOTE: The provenance of this information is unknown; the details are obtained solely from third party information.
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 · low confidenceStack-based buffer overflow in the NeoTraceExplorer.NeoTraceLoader ActiveX control (NeoTraceExplorer.dll) allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long argument string to the TraceTarget method. This affects NeoTrace Express 3.25 and NeoTrace Pro (McAfee Visual Trace) 3.25.
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= 3.25= 3.25CVSS 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
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/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.
-
Locate the NeoTraceExplorer.dll fileSearch the filesystem for NeoTraceExplorer.dll - common locations include C:\Program Files\NeoTrace, C:\Program Files\McAfee\Visual Trace, or C:\Program Files\McAfee\Neotrace. If found, right-click the file and view Properties to see the File Version.Affected if The DLL exists and its version is 3.25 (or if version cannot be determined but the file is present, treat as potentially affected)
-
Check if the ActiveX control is registeredOpen the Windows Registry Editor and search for the CLSID associated with NeoTraceExplorer.NeoTraceLoader under HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID, or search for 'NeoTraceExplorer.NeoTraceLoader' under HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT. Also check HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID and HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID.Affected if The ActiveX control is registered in the system registry, indicating it may be installed and loadable by Internet Explorer
-
Identify the installed software versionOpen Windows Control Panel > Programs and Features (or Add/Remove Programs), and look for 'NeoTrace Express', 'NeoTrace Pro', 'McAfee Visual Trace', or 'McAfee Neotrace' in the installed programs list. Note the version shown.Affected if The installed version is 3.25, matching the vulnerable version range
-
Verify if the vulnerable TraceTarget method is exposedThis requires examining the ActiveX control's exposed methods. Use a tool like OLEVIEW or dumpbin to inspect the type library of NeoTraceExplorer.dll, or check registry entries under the CLSID's 'Methods' subkey if present.Affected if The TraceTarget method is exposed by the registered ActiveX control (this method contains the buffer overflow vulnerability)
-
Check browser ActiveX settingsIn Internet Explorer, go to Internet Options > Security > Custom Level, and review the settings under 'ActiveX controls and plugins'. Also check whether the kill bit has been set for the control's CLSID in the registry under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\.Affected if The ActiveX control is allowed to run in browser security zones (kill bit is NOT set)
A system is affected if NeoTraceExplorer.dll version 3.25 is installed AND the NeoTraceExplorer.NeoTraceLoader ActiveX control is registered AND the control is not blocked (kill bit not set), because only then can the TraceTarget method buffer overflow be triggered.
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 dataDisable or remove the vulnerable NeoTrace ActiveX control. Set the kill bit for the CLSID in the Windows registry to prevent the control from loading in Internet Explorer, and disable ActiveX controls in browser security zones.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-6707 — 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-2006-6707 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