CVE-2008-2003
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 · uneditedBadBlue 2.72 Personal Edition stores multiple programs in the web document root with insufficient access control, which allows remote attackers to (1) cause a denial of service via multiple invocations of uninst.exe, and have an unknown impact via (2) badblue.exe and (3) dyndns.exe. NOTE: this can be leveraged for arbitrary remote code execution in conjunction with CVE-2007-6378.
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 confidenceBadBlue 2.72 Personal Edition stores executable programs (uninst.exe, badblue.exe, dyndns.exe) in the web document root without proper access controls, allowing remote attackers to invoke these programs directly via HTTP requests. This enables denial of service through repeated uninst.exe invocations and can be chained with CVE-2007-6378 to achieve arbitrary remote code execution.
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= 2.72CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/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.
-
Confirm BadBlue versionIdentify the installed BadBlue version by checking the badblue.exe file properties, service information, or by querying the running processAffected if BadBlue version 2.72 is installed and running
-
Locate the web document rootIdentify the web document root directory that BadBlue uses to serve HTTP content - this is typically configured in BadBlue's settings or ini fileAffected if A web document root is configured and accessible
-
Check for executable files in web rootList all files in the web document root directory and look for executable files such as uninst.exe, badblue.exe, and dyndns.exeAffected if Any executable files exist in the web document root directory
-
Test HTTP access to executablesSend HTTP GET requests to the server for the known executable filenames (uninst.exe, badblue.exe, dyndns.exe) to verify they can be invoked directlyAffected if The executable files are accessible and can be invoked via HTTP requests to the web server
The system is affected if BadBlue 2.72 is running and executable files like uninst.exe, badblue.exe, or dyndns.exe are present and accessible in the web document root, allowing direct HTTP invocation.
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 dataRestrict executable permissions on files in the web document root to prevent direct HTTP access to .exe files, or upgrade to a patched version of BadBlue if available. If the product is unsupported, migrate to a maintained web server with proper security configurations.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-2003 — 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-2008-2003 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