dbcve.org
Directory ServerApplication · Redhat

CVE-2008-0892

HIGH · 9.0 CVSS v2.0 Published 2008-04-16
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
96/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
The replication monitor CGI script (repl-monitor-cgi.pl) in Red Hat Administration Server, as used by Red Hat Directory Server 8.0 EL4 and EL5, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands.

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 confidence

Command injection vulnerability in the repl-monitor-cgi.pl CGI script of Red Hat Administration Server (used by Red Hat Directory Server 8.0 EL4/EL5) allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via unsanitized input.

MitigationRestrict network access to the replication monitor CGI script; if not needed, disable the script entirely. Apply vendor patches if available for affected Red Hat Directory Server versions.

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
Directory ServerApplication
Affected:= 7.1= 8
Fedora Directory ServerOperating system
Affected:all versions

CVSS 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
Single
Confidentiality
Complete
Integrity
Complete
Availability
Complete

AV:N/AC:L/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify if Red Hat or Fedora Directory Server is installed
    Query the installed packages for redhat-ds or fedora-ds related packages using the system package manager (e.g., rpm -qa | grep -i 'redhat-ds\|fedora-ds')
    Affected if The package name matches 'redhat-ds' or 'fedora-ds' and the installed version is 7.1, 8.0, or falls within the 8.x series for Red Hat, or any version for Fedora Directory Server
  2. Locate the repl-monitor-cgi.pl script
    Search for the CGI script in typical CGI directories or the Directory Server installation path (e.g., find / -name 'repl-monitor-cgi.pl' 2>/dev/null)
    Affected if The script file exists on the system, indicating the replication monitor CGI component is installed
  3. Check if the CGI script is enabled in the web server
    Examine the web server configuration (typically Apache httpd.conf or included conf files) for references to repl-monitor-cgi.pl or the CGI script alias path
    Affected if The script is configured and accessible via the web server (CGI execution is enabled for this script's directory)
  4. Verify network accessibility of the replication monitor
    Check if the CGI script responds by accessing it via HTTP/HTTPS (e.g., curl http://<server>/repl-monitor-cgi.pl) or by confirming the web server port is listening externally
    Affected if The CGI script is network-accessible, allowing remote attackers to send malicious input

A user is affected if they have Red Hat Directory Server 7.1, 8.x, or any version of Fedora Directory Server installed with the repl-monitor-cgi.pl CGI script enabled and network-accessible.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Restrict network access to the replication monitor CGI script; if not needed, disable the script entirely. Apply vendor patches if available for affected Red Hat Directory Server versions.

Fix this in Directory Server Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-0892 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2008-0892 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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