EvolutionApplication

CVE-2009-0547

MEDIUM · 5.0 CVSS v2.0 Published 2009-02-12

Mitigation only

No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.

See remediation →

59/100

Remediation priority · Elevated

Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

Official description

NVD · unedited

Evolution 2.22.3.1 checks S/MIME signatures against a copy of the e-mail text within a signed-data blob, not the copy of the e-mail text displayed to the user, which allows remote attackers to spoof a signature by modifying the latter copy, a different vulnerability than CVE-2008-5077.

Technical summary

dbcve analysis · high confidence

Evolution 2.22.3.1 has a signature verification flaw where S/MIME signatures are validated against a copy of email text stored within a signed-data blob, rather than against the copy of the email text that is displayed to the user. This mismatch allows remote attackers to modify the displayed email content while maintaining a valid cryptographic signature, effectively spoofing signed communications.

MitigationUsers should exercise caution with S/MIME signed emails from untrusted sources and consider upgrading Evolution to a patched version. Additionally, users can verify signatures through alternative methods or with external tools to confirm the integrity of displayed content.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

Affected products & versions

NVD · CPE data

EvolutionApplication

Affected:= 2.22.3.1

CVSS breakdown

From the vector

Attack vector: Network
Complexity: Low
Authentication: None
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Partial
Availability: None

AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N

Am I affected?

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

Identify Evolution installation version

Run 'evolution --version' or check your package manager for the installed Evolution package version

Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.22.3.1
Confirm S/MIME support is present

Check if Evolution has S/MIME capabilities enabled by inspecting the email account settings under Edit > Accounts > Security tab for S/MIME options, or check if libcryptui or related S/MIME libraries are installed

Affected if S/MIME signing/encryption capabilities are present in the Evolution installation
Determine if S/MIME signed emails are being processed

Examine received emails to identify any messages with S/MIME signatures - look for the signature icon in the email viewer or check the email headers for 'application/pkcs7-mime' or 'smime-type=signed-data'

Affected if S/MIME signed emails from external sources are being received and displayed
Verify signature validation behavior

Compare the displayed email content against what the signature actually covers by using an external S/MIME verification tool to re-verify the signature on the raw email data, noting any discrepancies between displayed text and signed content

Affected if The displayed content differs from the content covered by the cryptographic signature while still showing a valid signature indicator

A user is affected if they are running Evolution version 2.22.3.1 and processing S/MIME signed emails where the displayed content may not match what the cryptographic signature actually covers.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Remediation

From vendor data

Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime

Mitigation

Users should exercise caution with S/MIME signed emails from untrusted sources and consider upgrading Evolution to a patched version. Additionally, users can verify signatures through alternative methods or with external tools to confirm the integrity of displayed content.

Fix this in Evolution Scoped from the published advisory

Consultation4.0 h
Implementation12.0 h
Testing8.0 h
Review / QA4.0 h

28.0 hours of engineering $4,880

Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,808.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally

dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-0547 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2009-0547 in production — separate from our analysis above.

Notes0 Guidelines

Know something about CVE-2009-0547?

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here

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

At a glance

A fix existsA vendor remedy is published

Severity 5.0 Medium

Exploit likelihood EPSS, next 30 days 2.2%

Affects: Evolution

Remediation

Need this fixed?

Fix this in Evolution 28 hrs · Moderate

Typical engagement from $4,880

Get a fix See the full breakdown ↓

We specialise in CVE remediation. Send your environment and we’ll scope CVE-2009-0547 and return a fixed quote.

You’ll deal with our team directly and deploy the reviewed fix to staging first — never straight to production.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Check your environment

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.

Scan for this in your stack

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Practitioner notes

No notes yet

Official description

Technical summary

Affected products & versions

CVSS breakdown

Am I affected?

Remediation

References