CVE-2008-1692
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 · uneditedEterm 0.9.4 opens a terminal window on :0 if -display is not specified and the DISPLAY environment variable is not set, which might allow local users to hijack X11 connections. NOTE: realistic attack scenarios require that the victim enters a command on the wrong machine.
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 confidenceEterm 0.9.4 terminal emulator defaults to opening on display :0 when neither the -display command-line argument is provided nor the DISPLAY environment variable is set. This behavior can allow local users to hijack X11 connections by having the victim's terminal window appear on a display the attacker controls or has access to.
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= 0.9.4CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/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.
-
Identify installed Eterm versionRun 'eterm --version' or 'Eterm --version' to get the exact version number, or check your package manager (dpkg -l eterm, rpm -qa eterm)Affected if Version is exactly 0.9.4
-
Verify DISPLAY environment variable is unset in your shellRun 'echo $DISPLAY' before launching Eterm. If empty or not shown, the variable is not setAffected if DISPLAY environment variable is not set (empty output)
-
Observe which display Eterm connects to by defaultLaunch Eterm without -display flag and without DISPLAY set; check what display appears in 'xdotool getwindowfocus getwindowpid' then 'ps -p <pid> -o args=' or use 'xwininfo -root -tree' to see where the window appearsAffected if Eterm defaults to display :0 when neither -display nor DISPLAY is provided
You are affected if Eterm version 0.9.4 is installed AND you run it without setting DISPLAY or using the -display flag, causing it to default to display :0 where an attacker could intercept your X11 session.
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 dataUsers should ensure DISPLAY is properly configured and avoid running Eterm on shared systems without explicit display specification. Consider using the -display flag explicitly or setting DISPLAY before launching terminal applications.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,768.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-1692 — 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-2008-1692 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