CVE-2007-4609
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 · uneditedeyeOS uses predictable checksum values in the checknum parameter for access control, which allows remote attackers to register many accounts via doCreateUser actions, add many eyeBoard messages via addMsg actions, and cause a denial of service or conduct certain unauthorized activities, by guessing valid parameter values.
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 confidenceeyeOS uses predictable checksum values in the checknum parameter for access control. Attackers can guess valid checknum parameter values to bypass authentication and perform unauthorized actions including mass account registration, posting unauthorized messages to eyeBoard, and causing denial of service.
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
- Partial
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/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.
-
Identify if eyeOS is installedLook for eyeOS files in the web root directory (typically under /eyeOS/, /var/www/eyeOS/, or similar paths) or check running web server processes serving eyeOS contentAffected if eyeOS files or processes are found on the system
-
Check for checknum parameter usageInspect HTTP requests and application code for the 'checknum' parameter being used in authentication or authorization logic, typically in query strings or form submissionsAffected if The checknum parameter is used for access control decisions
-
Verify predictablity of checknum generationReview the source code or application logic that generates checknum values - look for sequential, time-based, or algorithmically predictable checksum generation rather than cryptographically random tokensAffected if checknum values are generated using predictable algorithms (sequential, hash of predictable data, or simple randomization)
-
Confirm lack of proper session validationTest whether sensitive operations (account registration, posting to eyeBoard) can be performed by simply providing a valid checknum without an active server-side sessionAffected if Sensitive actions can be performed using only a guessed checknum without requiring valid session authentication
If eyeOS is installed and uses checknum-based authentication without cryptographically secure random tokens or proper server-side session validation, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 dataReplace predictable checksum-based checknum values with cryptographically secure random tokens and implement proper server-side session-based authentication for sensitive operations.
- 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-2007-4609 — 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-2007-4609 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