CVE-2009-4642
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 · uneditedgnome-screensaver 2.26.1 relies on the gnome-session D-Bus interface to determine session idle time, even when an Xfce desktop such as Xubuntu or Mythbuntu is used, which allows physically proximate attackers to access an unattended workstation on which screen locking had been intended.
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 · moderate confidencegnome-screensaver 2.26.1 relies on the gnome-session D-Bus interface to determine session idle time even when an Xfce desktop (Xubuntu, Mythbuntu) is used, causing the screen lock to fail to activate properly and allowing physically proximate attackers to access an unattended workstation.
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= 2.26.1CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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.
-
Verify gnome-screensaver versionRun `gnome-screensaver --version` or check the package version using your distribution's package manager (e.g., `dpkg -l gnome-screensaver` on Debian/Ubuntu, `rpm -qi gnome-screensaver` on RHEL/Fedora)Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.26.1
-
Identify the desktop environmentCheck the DESKTOP_SESSION environment variable (`echo $DESKTOP_SESSION`) or inspect /etc/xdg/autostart for desktop-specific files, or look for Xfce-specific processes (`ps aux | grep xfce`)Affected if The system is running an Xfce-based desktop (Xubuntu, Mythbuntu, or other Xfce derivative)
-
Confirm gnome-screensaver is the active screen lockCheck the screensaver settings in the desktop environment: on Xfce, go to Settings > Screensaver and verify gnome-screensaver is selected, or run `gconftool-2 --get /apps/gnome-screensaver/idle_activation_enabled` to check if idle activation is enabledAffected if gnome-screensaver is configured as the active screen lock mechanism on an Xfce desktop
A user is affected if gnome-screensaver version 2.26.1 is installed and configured as the screen lock on an Xfce-based desktop environment, causing the lock to fail due to missing gnome-session D-Bus integration.
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 dataReplace gnome-screensaver with an Xfce-compatible screen lock solution (e.g., xfce4-screensaver or xlockmore) on affected Xfce-based systems, or properly configure gnome-session when gnome-screensaver must be used.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,744.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-4642 — 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-2009-4642 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