CVE-2007-0603
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 · uneditedPGP Desktop before 9.5.1 does not validate data objects received over the (1) \pipe\pgpserv named pipe for PGPServ.exe or the (2) \pipe\pgpsdkserv named pipe for PGPsdkServ.exe, which allows remote authenticated users to gain privileges by sending a data object representing an absolute pointer, which causes code execution at the corresponding address.
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 confidencePGP Desktop before 9.5.1 fails to validate data objects received over the \pipe\pgpserv and \pipe\pgpsdkserv named pipes. An authenticated remote attacker can send a data object representing an absolute pointer address, which the application will use for code execution, achieving privilege escalation.
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= 9.5CVSS 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
- High
- Authentication
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:H/Au:S/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.
-
Verify PGP Desktop installationCheck for PGP Desktop installation by reviewing installed programs in Add/Remove Programs (Windows) or checking for PGP-related services in the Services control panel.Affected if PGP Desktop is installed and version is 9.5 or earlier.
-
Determine installed PGP Desktop versionOpen Windows Registry Editor and navigate to HKLM\SOFTWARE\PGP Corporation\PGP Desktop or check the program's About/Help section within the PGP application.Affected if The version reported is 9.5.0 or any version lower than 9.5.1.
-
Identify if named pipe services are runningOpen a command prompt and run 'sc query type= service state= all | findstr /i pgp' or check the Services list for PGP-related services. Use Process Explorer or tasklist to confirm pgpserv.exe or pgpsdkserv.exe processes are active.Affected if The pgpserv or pgpsdkserv processes are running as services.
-
Check network exposure of named pipe servicesReview network configuration and firewall rules to determine if the host is accessible on ports used by PGP services or if SMB/named pipe traffic from untrusted networks can reach the system.Affected if The system is reachable over the network by untrusted or unauthenticated users and the PGP named pipe services are active.
A system is affected if PGP Desktop version 9.5.0 or earlier is installed and the pgpserv or pgpsdkserv named pipe services are running and accessible to potential attackers.
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 dataUpgrade PGP Desktop to version 9.5.1 or later, which implements proper validation of data objects received over the named pipes. If upgrade is not immediately possible, restrict network access to the affected services and limit authenticated user privileges.
- 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-2007-0603 — 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-2007-0603 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