CVE-2007-1822
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 · uneditedAlcatel-Lucent Lucent Technologies voice mail systems allow remote attackers to retrieve or remove messages, or reconfigure mailboxes, by spoofing Calling Number Identification (CNID, aka Caller ID).
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 · moderate confidenceThe Alcatel-Lucent Lucent voice mail system trusts Caller ID (CNID) information for authentication, allowing remote attackers to spoof their calling number and gain unauthorized access to voicemail mailboxes. This enables retrieval, deletion of messages, and reconfiguration of mailbox settings without proper credentials.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/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 if Alcatel Lucent Voice Mail System is deployedCheck your telecommunications infrastructure inventory or run: snmpwalk -v2c -c public <device_ip> sysDescr to query the device via SNMP, or access the voicemail administration interface and check the system information pageAffected if The system is running Alcatel Lucent Voice Mail System
-
Check voicemail authentication configurationAccess the voicemail administration panel (typically via web interface on port 8080 or 443), navigate to Security or Authentication settings, and inspect whether Caller ID (CNID) verification is enabled as a sole or primary authentication methodAffected if Caller ID-only authentication is enabled without requiring a PIN or password
-
Verify if PIN or password is required for mailbox accessAttempt to access a test mailbox or review the mailbox configuration settings to confirm whether a PIN or password must be entered in addition to Caller ID verificationAffected if No secondary PIN or password authentication is required - Caller ID alone grants access
-
Inspect network configuration for calling number validationCheck VoIP gateway or PBX configuration for CNID validation settings: review SIP headers (From/PAI fields), ISDN CNID settings on PRI circuits, or H.323 calling party information to determine if spoofed calling numbers are being acceptedAffected if Network equipment is configured to accept calling numbers without verification (e.g., no SIP header authentication, no CNID screening enabled)
A user is affected if their Alcatel Lucent Voice Mail System relies on Caller ID alone for authentication without requiring a PIN, password, or network-level calling number validation.
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 multi-factor authentication (e.g., PIN/password) for voicemail access rather than relying solely on Caller ID verification, and configure network-level controls to reject spoofed calling numbers.
- Consultation12.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing12.0 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 $15,936.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-1822 — 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-2007-1822 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