CVE-2007-5989
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 · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in the skype4com URI handler in Skype before 3.6 GOLD allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via "short string values" that result in heap corruption.
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 confidenceHeap corruption vulnerability in Skype's skype4com URI handler allows remote code execution via specially crafted short string values. The vulnerability exists in versions prior to 3.6 GOLD and stems from improper handling of URI parameters leading to heap memory corruption.
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= 0.98.0.04= 1.0.0.9= 1.0.0.10= 1.0.0.18= 1.0.0.29= 1.0.0.94= 1.0.0.97= 1.0.0.100= 1.1.0.0= 1.4.0.83= 1.5.0.79= 1.5.80CVSS 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/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.
-
Check if Skype is installedLook for Skype installation directory (commonly C:\Program Files\Skype\ or C:\Program Files (x86)\Skype\) and check for Skype.exe or related files.Affected if Skype is installed on the system
-
Identify installed Skype versionRight-click on Skype.exe, select Properties, then check the Details tab for File Version. Alternatively, launch Skype and go to Help > About Skype to view the version number.Affected if The installed version matches one of the affected versions listed: 0.98.0.04, 1.0.0.9, 1.0.0.10, 1.0.0.18, 1.0.0.29, 1.0.0.94, 1.0.0.97, 1.0.0.100, 1.1.0.0, 1.4.0.83, 1.5.0.79, or 1.5.80
-
Verify skype4com component presenceCheck Windows Registry for skype4com handler registration under HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\skype4com or look for skype4com.dll in the Skype installation directory.Affected if The skype4com URI handler component is registered and present on the system
If Skype is installed with a version prior to 3.6 GOLD and the skype4com URI handler component is present, the system 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 dataUpgrade Skype to version 3.6 GOLD or later to remediate this vulnerability.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-5989 — 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-2007-5989 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