CVE-2010-0385
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 · uneditedTor before 0.2.1.22, and 0.2.2.x before 0.2.2.7-alpha, when functioning as a bridge directory authority, allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information about bridge identities and bridge descriptors via a dbg-stability.txt directory query.
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 confidenceTor before 0.2.1.22 and 0.2.2.x before 0.2.2.7-alpha, when configured as a bridge directory authority, exposes sensitive bridge identity information and bridge descriptors through an unprotected dbg-stability.txt query endpoint, allowing remote attackers to obtain this information.
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= 0.0.2= 0.0.2_pre13= 0.0.2_pre14= 0.0.2_pre15= 0.0.2_pre16= 0.0.2_pre17= 0.0.2_pre18= 0.0.2_pre19= 0.0.2_pre20= 0.0.2_pre21= 0.0.2_pre22= 0.0.2_pre23CVSS 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.
-
Check Tor versionRun 'tor --version' or inspect the tor binary metadata to determine the installed version numberAffected if Version is before 0.2.1.22, or is 0.2.2.x before 0.2.2.7-alpha, or matches the older 0.0.2 series variants listed in affected products
-
Identify if Tor is configured as a bridge directory authorityExamine the torrc configuration file (commonly at /etc/tor/torrc or ~/Library/Application Support/Tor/torrc) for 'BridgeAuthoritativeDirectory 1' or 'AuthoritativeDirectory 1' combined with bridge-related settingsAffected if The instance is configured as a bridge directory authority (BridgeAuthoritativeDirectory enabled)
-
Verify the vulnerable endpoint is exposedAttempt to access http://localhost:9030/dbg-stability.txt or http://127.0.0.1:9030/dbg-stability.txt (or the configured DirPort) using a web browser or curl commandAffected if The dbg-stability.txt endpoint returns data containing bridge identity information or bridge descriptors without authentication
You are affected if your Tor version is vulnerable AND the instance is configured as a bridge directory authority AND the dbg-stability.txt endpoint is accessible and returns sensitive bridge data.
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 Tor 0.2.1.22 or 0.2.2.7-alpha or later. If immediate upgrade is not feasible, disable bridge directory authority functionality until patching can be completed.
- Consultation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-0385 — 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-2010-0385 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