CVE-2009-0803
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 · uneditedSmoothWall SmoothGuardian, as used in SmoothWall Firewall, NetworkGuardian, and SchoolGuardian 2008, when transparent interception mode is enabled, uses the HTTP Host header to determine the remote endpoint, which allows remote attackers to bypass access controls for Flash, Java, Silverlight, and probably other technologies, and possibly communicate with restricted intranet sites, via a crafted web page that causes a client to send HTTP requests with a modified Host header.
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 confidenceSmoothWall SmoothGuardian in transparent interception mode incorrectly uses the HTTP Host header to determine the destination for access control decisions. An attacker can craft a malicious web page that modifies the Host header to bypass restrictions on technologies like Flash, Java, and Silverlight, potentially reaching restricted intranet sites.
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= 2008= 2008= 2008CVSS 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
- High
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:C/I:N/A:N
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 SmoothWall product and versionCheck the installed SmoothWall product type (Networkguardian, Schoolguardian, or Smoothguardian) and its version number. This may be visible in the system dashboard, about page, or version file.Affected if The installed product is Smoothwall Networkguardian, Schoolguardian, or Smoothguardian version 2008
-
Confirm transparent interception mode is enabledLocate the proxy configuration settings in the SmoothWall admin interface or configuration files. Look for settings related to transparent proxy, transparent interception, or transparent mode.Affected if Transparent interception mode is enabled in the proxy configuration
-
Verify access control rule configurationReview the access control rules or content filtering policies configured in SmoothGuardian. Identify whether rules specify restrictions based on content types like Flash, Java, or Silverlight.Affected if Access control rules exist that restrict technologies like Flash, Java, or Silverlight and rely on Host header for destination determination
-
Test Host header handlingIf possible, send a test HTTP request through the proxy with a Host header that differs from the actual destination server. Observe whether the request is allowed or blocked based on the Host header rather than the true endpoint.Affected if The proxy makes access decisions based on the Host header value without validating it against the actual connection target
A defender is affected if they are running SmoothWall Networkguardian, Schoolguardian, or Smoothguardian version 2008 with transparent interception mode enabled and with access controls that rely on the HTTP Host header for destination filtering.
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 dataDisable transparent interception mode and use explicit proxy configuration instead, or implement proper validation of the Host header against the actual connection endpoint rather than trusting the header value alone.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-0803 — 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-2009-0803 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