CVE-2009-0759
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 · uneditedMultiple CRLF injection vulnerabilities in webadmin in ZNC before 0.066 allow remote authenticated users to modify the znc.conf configuration file and gain privileges via CRLF sequences in the quit message and other vectors.
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 confidenceCRLF injection vulnerability in ZNC webadmin before version 0.066 allows remote authenticated users to inject carriage return and line feed characters into parameters like the quit message. This enables manipulation of the znc.conf configuration file and potential privilege escalation.
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<= 0.062= 0.056= 0.058CVSS 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
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/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.
-
Determine installed ZNC versionRun `znc --version` or check your package manager for the installed znc package versionAffected if The version is 0.056, 0.058, or any version 0.062 or lower
-
Verify webadmin module is loadedCheck znc.conf for a LoadModule line containing 'webadmin', or run `znc --listmodules` to see loaded modulesAffected if The webadmin module is loaded and accessible
-
Confirm remote access to webadminCheck znc.conf for the webadmin Listen clause - look for Listen port configurations that bind to 0.0.0.0 or non-localhost addresses, rather than 127.0.0.1 onlyAffected if Webadmin is accessible from remote hosts (not bound to localhost only)
-
Check if remote user authentication existsReview znc.conf for defined users with valid passwords, or check if any webadmin users have login credentials configuredAffected if Remote authenticated users exist in the ZNC configuration
You are affected if ZNC version is 0.056, 0.058, or 0.062 or lower AND the webadmin module is loaded and accessible to remote authenticated users.
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 ZNC to version 0.066 or later to patch the CRLF injection vulnerability in webadmin.
- 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-2009-0759 — 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-2009-0759 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