CVE-2009-4499
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 · uneditedSQL injection vulnerability in the get_history_lastid function in the nodewatcher component in Zabbix Server before 1.6.8 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via a crafted request, possibly related to the send_history_last_id function in zabbix_server/trapper/nodehistory.c.
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 confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in Zabbix Server's nodewatcher component allows remote unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the get_history_lastid function in zabbix_server/trapper/nodehistory.c. The vulnerability exists in versions before 1.6.8 and stems from improper input sanitization in the send_history_last_id function.
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<= 1.6.7= 1.1.2= 1.1.3= 1.1.4= 1.1.5= 1.4.2= 1.4.3= 1.4.4= 1.4.6= 1.6.6CVSS 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.
-
Identify Zabbix Server installation and versionRun 'zabbix_server --version' or check package manager (rpm -q zabbix-server, dpkg -l zabbix-server) to find the installed versionAffected if Version is 1.6.7 or lower, or matches any of these: 1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.1.4, 1.1.5, 1.4.2, 1.4.3, 1.4.4, 1.4.6, or 1.6.6
-
Verify nodewatcher component is in useCheck Zabbix configuration files (typically zabbix_server.conf) for node-related settings or look for 'nodehistory' module files in the Zabbix installation directoryAffected if Nodewatcher or node synchronization features are configured and active
-
Confirm trapper port exposureCheck network listening ports (netstat -tlnp or ss -tlnp) for Zabbix trapper port (default 10051) and determine if it is accessible from untrusted networksAffected if Port 10051 (or configured trapper port) is exposed to untrusted networks without firewall restrictions
-
Inspect trapper logs for suspicious SQL-like patternsReview Zabbix Server logs for requests containing SQL syntax (SELECT, UNION, --, ';') sent to the trapper port, particularly around the nodehistory functionalityAffected if Logs show SQL injection attempts or unusual queries in trapper communications
Your environment is affected if Zabbix Server version is 1.6.7 or lower (or matches any affected point version) and the nodewatcher/trapper component is accessible to remote attackers.
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 to Zabbix Server 1.6.8 or later to obtain the vendor patch. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, restrict network access to the Zabbix Server trapper port and implement web application firewall rules to detect and block SQL injection patterns in requests.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-4499 — 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-2009-4499 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