PythonApplication · Python Software Foundation
CVE-2008-4108
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 · uneditedTools/faqwiz/move-faqwiz.sh (aka the generic FAQ wizard moving tool) in Python 2.4.5 might allow local users to overwrite arbitrary files via a symlink attack on a tmp$RANDOM.tmp temporary file. NOTE: there may not be common usage scenarios in which tmp$RANDOM.tmp is located in an untrusted directory.
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 confidenceA symlink attack vulnerability exists in the move-faqwiz.sh script from Python 2.4.5's faq wizard tool. The script uses predictable temporary filenames (tmp$RANDOM.tmp) that can be pre-emptively created by a local attacker as symlinks, causing the script to write to arbitrary files when executed with elevated privileges.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
PythonApplication
= 2.4.5CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed Python versionRun 'python --version' or 'python2 --version' to determine the Python version currently installed on the systemAffected if The installed version is Python 2.4.5 exactly
-
Locate the faq wizard scriptSearch for the move-faqwiz.sh script in the Python installation directory, typically under lib/python2.4/Tools/scripts/ or similar paths containing 'faqwiz' in the filenameAffected if The move-faqwiz.sh script exists on the system
-
Examine the temporary file creation patternOpen the move-faqwiz.sh script and search for the string 'tmp$RANDOM.tmp' or 'tmp.*.tmp' to identify the vulnerable temporary file creation methodAffected if The script contains the predictable tmp$RANDOM.tmp pattern in temporary file creation code
-
Verify script permissionsCheck file permissions of the move-faqwiz.sh script using 'ls -la' to determine if it has setuid, setgid, or elevated privilege execution bits setAffected if The script has setuid/setgid permissions or is executed with root/sudo privileges in a multi-user environment where untrusted users can preempt the symlink creation
A system is affected if Python 2.4.5 is installed, the move-faqwiz.sh faq wizard script exists with the vulnerable tmp$RANDOM.tmp pattern, and the script runs with elevated privileges in an environment where local attackers can preempt symlink creation.
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 dataReplace the predictable tmp$RANDOM.tmp temporary file creation with secure methods such as mktemp or the Python tempfile module, and ensure temporary files are created in trusted directories with proper permissions.
Fix this in Python
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,424.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-4108 — 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-2008-4108 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