CVE-2007-4422
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 login interface in Symantec Enterprise Firewall 6.x, when a VPN with pre-shared key (PSK) authentication is enabled, generates different responses depending on whether or not a username is valid, which allows remote attackers to enumerate valid usernames.
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 confidenceSymantec Enterprise Firewall 6.x with VPN PSK authentication enabled returns different login response messages for valid vs. invalid usernames, enabling remote attackers to enumerate valid user accounts through the login interface.
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= 6CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:M/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.
-
Confirm product and version installedCheck installed version of Symantec Enterprise Firewall. On Windows, check Add/Remove Programs or examine the executable version. On Unix, check the package or binary version.Affected if Version is 6.x (any subversion of 6)
-
Verify VPN PSK authentication is enabledAccess the firewall administrative console and review VPN authentication settings. Check if PSK (Pre-Shared Key) authentication is configured for VPN access.Affected if VPN with PSK authentication is actively enabled on the firewall
-
Test login response for valid vs invalid usernamesAttempt login with a known-valid username but wrong password, then with a clearly invalid username. Compare the error messages returned by the login interface.Affected if The responses differ between valid and invalid usernames (e.g., one says 'user does not exist' vs 'invalid password')
-
Review authentication response configurationExamine the firewall's authentication or VPN settings for options controlling login response verbosity. Look for settings governing error message content for failed logins.Affected if The system is configured to return specific error messages that reveal username validity rather than generic 'authentication failed' responses
A user is affected if they run Symantec Enterprise Firewall version 6.x with VPN PSK authentication enabled and the login interface returns distinguishable error messages for valid versus invalid usernames.
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 dataConfigure the login interface to return identical responses for both valid and invalid usernames, regardless of authentication failure reason, to prevent username enumeration.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-4422 — 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-2007-4422 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