CVE-2006-7028
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 · uneditedSingle CPU Sun systems running Solaris 7, 8, or 9, such as Netra, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (console hang) via a flood of small TCP/IP packets. NOTE: this issue has not been replicated by third parties. In addition, the cause is unknown, although it might be related to "jabber" and generation of a large amount of interrupts within the console, or a hardware error.
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 confidenceSingle CPU Sun systems running Solaris 7, 8, or 9 can suffer a console hang denial of service when flooded with small TCP/IP packets, possibly due to excessive interrupt generation ('jabber'). However, the issue has not been independently replicated and the root cause remains unknown.
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= 9.0= 5.7= 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/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 the installed Solaris versionRun 'uname -a' or 'cat /etc/release' to display system version informationAffected if The system is running Solaris 7 (SunOS 5.7), Solaris 8 (SunOS 5.8), or Solaris 9 (SunOS 5.9)
-
Verify the SunOS kernel versionRun 'uname -r' to display the kernel release version; 5.7 corresponds to Solaris 7, 5.8 to Solaris 8, and 5.9 to Solaris 9Affected if The output shows 5.7, 5.8, or 5.9 as the kernel release
-
Check if the system is single-CPU configuredRun 'psrinfo' or examine '/proc/cpuinfo' if available on Solaris to list processor configurationAffected if Only a single processor is configured (this may be difficult to verify on legacy systems)
-
Confirm network exposure to untrusted trafficReview network interface configuration using 'ifconfig -a' and routing tables with 'netstat -rn'Affected if The system has directly accessible network interfaces exposed to untrusted traffic or the internet
The system is likely affected if it runs Solaris 7, 8, or 9 (SunOS 5.7, 5.8, or 5.9) and is network-accessible, as the console hang occurs when flooded with small TCP/IP packets.
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 dataImplement network perimeter filtering or rate-limiting to block inbound packet floods; consider network isolation or retirement of these legacy Solaris systems if feasible, as patches are unlikely to exist.
- 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-2006-7028 — 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-2006-7028 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