CVE-2009-0347
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 · uneditedOpen redirect vulnerability in cs.html in the Autonomy (formerly Verity) Ultraseek search engine allows remote attackers to redirect users to arbitrary web sites and conduct phishing attacks via the url parameter.
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 confidenceOpen redirect vulnerability in cs.html of the Autonomy Ultraseek search engine allows remote attackers to manipulate the url parameter to redirect users to arbitrary external websites, facilitating phishing attacks.
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= _nil_CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/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 if Autonomy Ultraseek is installedSearch for Ultraseek installation directories or check running services. Common locations: /opt/ultraseek, C:\Program Files\Autonomy\Ultraseek, or check for processes named 'ultraseek' or 'Ultraseek'.Affected if Autonomy Ultraseek software is found on the system
-
Determine the installed versionCheck version files in the installation directory, such as VERSION.txt, or look at the admin interface for version information. You can also check the cs.html file header or properties for version indicators.Affected if Version is present and matches any Autonomy Ultraseek release (all versions are potentially affected)
-
Locate the cs.html fileFind the cs.html file in the web root or document directory of the Ultraseek installation. This is typically in the public_html orhtdocs folder.Affected if The cs.html file exists in the web-accessible directory
-
Check if the url parameter handling is vulnerableInspect the cs.html source code or the underlying CGI/scripts to see how the 'url' parameter is processed. Look for any redirect logic that uses the url parameter without proper validation.Affected if The code uses the url parameter to perform redirects without validating that the destination is internal or whitelisted
-
Test the redirect behavior safely (if authorized)Send a request to cs.html with a test url parameter pointing to an external domain (for example: ?url=http://example.com). Observe if the application redirects to the external site without validation warnings.Affected if The application redirects to arbitrary external URLs provided in the url parameter
A system is affected if Autonomy Ultraseek is installed and the cs.html file uses the url parameter to perform redirects without validating that the destination is internal or whitelisted.
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 dataImplement strict validation of the url parameter using a whitelist approach, allowing only trusted domains or relative paths, and reject any attempt to redirect to external untrusted sites.
- 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-2009-0347 — 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-2009-0347 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