CVE-2010-0084
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 · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in the Java Runtime Environment component in Oracle Java SE and Java for Business 6 Update 18, 5.0 Update 23, and 1.4.2_25 allows remote attackers to affect confidentiality via unknown vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2010-0091.
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 · low confidenceA vulnerability in the Java Runtime Environment (JRE) in Oracle Java SE/Java for Business versions 6 Update 18, 5.0 Update 23, and 1.4.2_25 allows remote attackers to impact confidentiality through unspecified vectors. This is a different flaw than CVE-2010-0091.
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<= 1.6.0= 1.6.0<= 1.5.0= 1.5.0<= 1.4.2_25= 1.4.2= 1.4.2_1= 1.4.2_2= 1.4.2_3= 1.4.2_4= 1.4.2_5= 1.4.2_6<= 1.6.0= 1.6.0<= 1.5.0= 1.5.0<= 1.4.2_25= 1.4.2= 1.4.2_1= 1.4.2_02= 1.4.2_3= 1.4.2_4= 1.4.2_5= 1.4.2_6= 1.4.2_7= 1.4.2_8= 1.4.2_9= 1.4.2_10CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/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 installed Java versionRun 'java -version' from command line or check the Java Control Panel / About sectionAffected if Version displayed is 1.6.0 or lower, 1.5.0 or lower, or 1.4.2_25 / 1.4.2_1 through 1.4.2_10
-
Confirm Java is JRE, JDK, or SDK variantCheck if the installed package is Sun JRE, Sun JDK, or Sun SDK by inspecting the product name in installation details or package managerAffected if The installed product is Sun JRE, Sun JDK, or Sun SDK and version matches the affected ranges
-
Compare against affected version listMatch the installed version number against the affected versions: 1.6.0 and below, 1.5.0 and below, 1.4.2_25, 1.4.2_1 through 1.4.2_10Affected if Installed version exactly matches or falls within the specified affected version ranges
A system is affected if Sun JRE, JDK, or SDK version 1.6.0 or lower, 1.5.0 or lower, or 1.4.2_25 / 1.4.2_1 through 1.4.2_10 is installed and running.
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 Java to a patched version (later updates) or remove obsolete Java installations. For legacy systems requiring these specific versions, consider network segmentation and disabling Java browser plugins.
- 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-2010-0084 — 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 sources- itrc.hp.com
- lists.apple.com
- lists.apple.com
- lists.opensuse.org
- lists.opensuse.org
- lists.opensuse.org
- marc.info
- marc.info
- osvdb.org
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- support.apple.com
- support.apple.com
- ubuntu.com
- www.mandriva.com
- www.oracle.com
- www.oracle.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.securityfocus.com
- www.vmware.com
- www.vmware.com
- www.vupen.com
- www.vupen.com
- www.vupen.com
- www.vupen.com
- oval.cisecurity.org
- oval.cisecurity.org
- nvd.nist.gov
Practitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2010-0084 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