CVE-2009-1383
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 · uneditedThe getdirective function in mathtex.cgi in mathTeX, when downloaded before 20090713, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters in the dpi tag.
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 confidenceThe getdirective function in mathtex.cgi fails to sanitize shell metacharacters from the dpi tag parameter before passing it to a shell command, allowing remote attackers to inject and execute arbitrary OS commands.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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.
-
Locate mathtex.cgi installationSearch for mathtex.cgi in common web directories (e.g., /cgi-bin/, /usr/lib/cgi-bin/, /var/www/cgi-bin/) or use 'find / -name mathtex.cgi 2>/dev/null'Affected if mathtex.cgi file exists on the system
-
Identify mathtex versionOpen mathtex.cgi and look for version strings near the top of the file (e.g., '$VERSION', 'Version:', date stamps)Affected if Version is earlier than 20090713 or no version string is present (indicating unpatched version)
-
Verify dpi parameter is processedSearch the mathtex.cgi source for 'dpi' or 'getdirective' to confirm the dpi parameter handling code existsAffected if The getdirective function and dpi parameter handling code are present in the script
-
Check for shell metacharacter sanitizationIn mathtex.cgi, locate the getdirective function and examine how the dpi value is used. Look for absence of sanitization (e.g., no regex filtering of special characters like $ ` ; | &) before shell executionAffected if No input validation or sanitization is performed on the dpi parameter before it is passed to shell commands (eval, system, backticks, etc.)
-
Confirm web exposureIf mathtex.cgi is accessible via web server, attempt a request with a benign dpi value (e.g., ?\dpi=100) to confirm the CGI is functionalAffected if The mathtex.cgi is accessible and processes requests
The system is affected if mathtex.cgi is installed and accessible, and the installed version is earlier than 20090713 or lacks sanitization of the dpi parameter in the getdirective function.
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 mathTeX to version 20090713 or later which implements proper input sanitization for the dpi parameter. Alternatively, add input validation to reject shell metacharacters before the dpi value is used in shell execution.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-1383 — 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-2009-1383 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