CVE-2009-0034
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 · uneditedparse.c in sudo 1.6.9p17 through 1.6.9p19 does not properly interpret a system group (aka %group) in the sudoers file during authorization decisions for a user who belongs to that group, which allows local users to leverage an applicable sudoers file and gain root privileges via a sudo command.
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 confidenceIn sudo versions 1.6.9p17 through 1.6.9p19, the parse.c component fails to correctly process system group (%group) entries in the sudoers file when making authorization decisions for users who are members of those groups. This parsing flaw allows a local user belonging to a group with sudoers permissions to escalate privileges to root by executing sudo commands.
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= 4.0= 1.6.9CVSS 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
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 the installed sudo versionRun 'sudo -V' or 'sudo --version' to retrieve the sudo version number installed on the systemAffected if The version displayed falls within the range 1.6.9p17 through 1.6.9p19 (or matches VMware ESX 4.0 which ships with affected sudo)
-
Locate and examine the sudoers fileOpen /etc/sudoers (or run 'visudo' to view it safely) and search for any entries beginning with '%' which indicate system group permissionsAffected if Any %group entries exist in the sudoers file that grant sudo privileges to system groups
-
Identify group membership of the current userRun 'groups' or 'id' command to see which groups the current user belongs toAffected if The user is a member of any group that appears after a '%' prefix in the sudoers file
-
Check if %group entries grant root-level privilegesReview the sudoers %group entries to determine what commands (particularly any without a full path or involving /bin/sh, /bin/bash, or su) are permitted for those groupsAffected if Any %group entries grant privileges to run commands as root (indicated by (ALL) ALL or (root) ALL without user restrictions)
A system is affected if it runs sudo version 1.6.9p17-1.6.9p19 and has %group entries in sudoers that grant sudo privileges to groups the user belongs to.
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 sudo to version 1.6.9p20 or later (or to a current stable version) to obtain the patched parse.c implementation that correctly handles %group sudoers entries.
- 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-2009-0034 — 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 sources- www.securityfocus.com
- www.securityfocus.com
- www.securityfocus.com
- www.securitytracker.com
- www.vmware.com
- www.gratisoft.us
- bugzilla.novell.com
- www.vupen.com
- lists.vmware.com
- osvdb.org
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- wiki.rpath.com
- www.mandriva.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.sudo.ws
- issues.rpath.com
- oval.cisecurity.org
- oval.cisecurity.org
- nvd.nist.gov
Practitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2009-0034 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