CVE-2008-1052
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 administration web interface in NetWin SurgeFTP 2.3a2 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via a large integer in the Content-Length HTTP header, which triggers a NULL pointer dereference when memory allocation fails.
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 administration web interface in NetWin SurgeFTP 2.3a2 and earlier is vulnerable to a denial of service attack. Remote attackers can send an HTTP request with an excessively large integer value in the Content-Length header, causing the server to attempt allocating an unmanageable amount of memory. When this allocation fails, a NULL pointer dereference occurs, crashing the daemon.
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= 2.3a2CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/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.
-
Confirm SurgeFTP is installedLook for SurgeFTP installation directories (common paths: C:\Program Files\SurgeFTP on Windows, /opt/surgeftp or /usr/local/surgeftp on Linux). Check for the surgeftp executable or service.Affected if SurgeFTP is found on the system
-
Identify the installed SurgeFTP versionRun 'surgeftp -v' or 'surgeftp --version' from the installation directory, or check the version displayed in the admin web interface login page.Affected if The version number is 2.3a2 or earlier (e.g., 2.3a, 2.3, 2.2, etc.)
-
Determine if the administration web interface is enabledCheck the SurgeFTP configuration file (surgeftp.ini or surgeftp.cfg) for 'AdminPort' or 'httpd' settings. Common default admin ports are 8080 or 8787. Verify the service is listening on these ports.Affected if The admin web interface is enabled and bound to a network-accessible IP (0.0.0.0) rather than localhost only (127.0.0.1)
-
Verify remote accessibility of the admin interfaceFrom a remote system, attempt to connect to the admin port (e.g., http://target:8080 or http://target:8787). Use netstat or nmap locally to check if the admin port is listening on external interfaces.Affected if The admin web interface is reachable from network hosts other than localhost
A user is affected if SurgeFTP version 2.3a2 or earlier is installed AND the administration web interface is enabled and accessible remotely.
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 to a version newer than SurgeFTP 2.3a2. If immediate upgrade is not feasible, restrict or disable remote access to the administration web interface to reduce attack surface.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-1052 — 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-2008-1052 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