CVE-2008-6065
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 · uneditedOracle Database Server 10.1, 10.2, and 11g grants directory WRITE permissions for arbitrary pathnames that are aliased in a CREATE OR REPLACE DIRECTORY statement, which allows remote authenticated users with CREATE ANY DIRECTORY privileges to gain SYSDBA privileges by aliasing the pathname of the password directory, and then overwriting the password file through UTL_FILE operations, a related issue to CVE-2006-7141.
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 confidenceOracle Database 10.1/10.2/11g incorrectly grants WRITE permissions to aliased pathnames in CREATE OR REPLACE DIRECTORY statements. An authenticated user with CREATE ANY DIRECTORY privileges can alias the password directory pathname, then use UTL_FILE to overwrite the password file and gain SYSDBA 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= 10.1= 10.2= 11CVSS 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
- High
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:H/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.
-
Identify Oracle Database versionRun SELECT VERSION FROM V$INSTANCE; or SELECT BANNER FROM V$VERSION WHERE BANNER LIKE 'Oracle Database%';Affected if Version is 10.1, 10.2, or 11g (any 11.x release)
-
Check for CREATE ANY DIRECTORY privilegeRun SELECT GRANTEE, PRIVILEGE FROM DBA_TAB_PRIVS WHERE PRIVILEGE = 'CREATE ANY DIRECTORY'; to list users with this privilege.Affected if Any non-administrative user or application schema has CREATE ANY DIRECTORY privilege
-
Identify directory objects pointing to sensitive locationsRun SELECT OWNER, DIRECTORY_NAME, DIRECTORY_PATH FROM DBA_DIRECTORIES; Check if any path points to the Oracle password file directory (typically $ORACLE_HOME/dbs or the location of orapw files).Affected if A DIRECTORY object exists with a path that aliases the password file directory or other sensitive Oracle infrastructure locations
-
Verify UTL_FILE accessibility for non-admin usersRun SELECT GRANTEE, TABLE_NAME FROM DBA_TAB_PRIVS WHERE TABLE_NAME = 'UTL_FILE'; to see who can use UTL_FILE.Affected if A user with CREATE ANY DIRECTORY privilege also has EXECUTE on UTL_FILE
A user is affected if they run Oracle Database 10.1, 10.2, or 11g AND have a non-admin user with both CREATE ANY DIRECTORY privilege and access to UTL_FILE, with a directory object aliasing the password file location.
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 or revoke CREATE ANY DIRECTORY privileges from non-administrative users, apply Oracle patches, and monitor directory object creation for suspicious aliasing of sensitive paths like the password file directory.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-6065 — 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-2008-6065 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