CVE-2009-0180
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 · uneditedCertain Fedora build scripts for nfs-utils before 1.1.2-9.fc9 on Fedora 9, and before 1.1.4-6.fc10 on Fedora 10, omit TCP Wrapper support, which might allow remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions, possibly a related issue to CVE-2008-1376.
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 confidenceThe Fedora build scripts for nfs-utils versions before 1.1.2-9.fc9 (Fedora 9) and 1.1.4-6.fc10 (Fedora 10) omitted TCP Wrapper support during compilation. TCP Wrappers provides host-based access control via /etc/hosts.allow and /etc/hosts.deny. Without this support, NFS services could potentially accept connections from hosts that should be denied, bypassing intended access restrictions.
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<= 1.1.2= 0.2= 0.2.1= 0.3.1= 0.3.3= 1.0= 1.0.1= 1.0.2= 1.0.3= 1.0.4= 1.0.6= 1.0.7CVSS 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.
-
Check installed nfs-utils versionRun 'rpm -q nfs-utils' or 'nfsd --version' to retrieve the installed versionAffected if Version is 1.1.2 or earlier, or matches one of the affected versions (0.2, 0.2.1, 0.3.1, 0.3.3, 1.0, 1.0.1, 1.0.2, 1.0.3, 1.0.4, 1.0.6, 1.0.7)
-
Verify TCP Wrapper library linkage in NFS binariesRun 'ldd /usr/sbin/rpc.nfsd 2>/dev/null | grep -i wrap' or 'strings /usr/sbin/rpc.nfsd | grep -i hosts_allow' to check if the binary is linked against libwrapAffected if No libwrap library is found or no TCP Wrapper strings are present in the binary, indicating TCP Wrappers support was not compiled in
-
Check nfs-utils RPM build configurationRun 'rpm -qa --queryformat '%{NAME} %{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n' | grep nfs-utils' and if available, check 'rpm -q --scripts nfs-utils' for build-time configuration flagsAffected if The package was built without --enable-tcpwrappers or equivalent TCP Wrapper configuration
-
Test TCP Wrapper enforcement on NFS servicesAdd a restrictive rule to /etc/hosts.deny (e.g., 'rpcbind: ALL') and attempt an NFS connection from a client; then check /etc/hosts.allow to verify if it contains exceptions for NFS servicesAffected if NFS connections are accepted despite being denied in /etc/hosts.deny, confirming TCP Wrappers are not being consulted
You are affected if the nfs-utils version is 1.1.2 or earlier and the NFS binaries are not linked against the TCP Wrappers library (libwrap), meaning /etc/hosts.allow and /etc/hosts.deny rules are not being enforced on NFS connections.
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 dataUpdate nfs-utils to version 1.1.2-9.fc9 or later on Fedora 9, or 1.1.4-6.fc10 or later on Fedora 10. Alternatively, rebuild nfs-utils from source with TCP Wrapper support enabled (configure with --enable-tcpwrappers).
- 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-2009-0180 — 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-2009-0180 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