dbcve.org
SudoApplication · Todd Miller

CVE-2010-1163

MEDIUM · 6.9 CVSS v2.0 Published 2010-04-16
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
74/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
The command matching functionality in sudo 1.6.8 through 1.7.2p5 does not properly handle when a file in the current working directory has the same name as a pseudo-command in the sudoers file and the PATH contains an entry for ".", which allows local users to execute arbitrary commands via a Trojan horse executable, as demonstrated using sudoedit, a different vulnerability than CVE-2010-0426.

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 confidence

The sudo command matching in versions 1.6.8 through 1.7.2p5 fails to properly handle executables when the PATH contains '.' (current directory) and a file in the working directory shares the name of a sudoers-defined pseudo-command. An attacker with write access to a directory can place a malicious executable that sudo will inadvertently execute with elevated privileges.

MitigationRemove '.' from the PATH environment variable in system profiles, and ensure the sudoers file uses absolute paths for all command specifications. Avoid running sudo from directories writable by untrusted users.

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
SudoApplication
Affected:= 1.6.8= 1.6.8_p1= 1.6.8_p2= 1.6.8_p5= 1.6.8_p7= 1.6.8_p8= 1.6.8_p9= 1.6.8_p12= 1.6.8p7= 1.6.9_p17= 1.6.9_p18= 1.6.9_p19

CVSS 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
M
Authentication
None
Confidentiality
Complete
Integrity
Complete
Availability
Complete

AV:L/AC:M/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed sudo version
    Run `sudo --version` or check the package version using your system's package manager (e.g., `dpkg -l sudo`, `rpm -q sudo`)
    Affected if The version matches one of: 1.6.8, 1.6.8_p1, 1.6.8_p2, 1.6.8_p5, 1.6.8_p7, 1.6.8_p8, 1.6.8_p9, 1.6.8_p12, 1.6.8p7, 1.6.9_p17, 1.6.9_p18, 1.6.9_p19, or falls within the 1.6.8 through 1.7.2p5 range
  2. Check if PATH contains current directory
    Run `echo $PATH` and examine the output for a dot character (`.`) representing the current directory, either as `:` alone, `./`, or at the start/end of the PATH string
    Affected if The PATH contains an entry of `.` or `./` representing the current working directory
  3. Verify sudoers file uses relative command paths
    Inspect the sudoers file (typically /etc/sudoers or files in /etc/sudoers.d/) using `visudo`, looking for command specifications that do not start with `/`
    Affected if Any command entry in sudoers specifies a relative path (does not begin with `/`) or a pseudo-command alias that could be matched by a file in the current directory
  4. Check if sudoers defines any commands or aliases
    Review the sudoers file for any Runas, Cmnd, or command aliases defined, as these pseudo-commands could be exploited
    Affected if The sudoers file contains any defined commands, aliases, or Runas specifications that could be mimicked by a malicious executable in the current directory

You are affected if your sudo version is 1.6.8 through 1.7.2p5, your PATH includes the current directory, and your sudoers configuration uses relative paths or defines commands that could be overwritten by a file in your working directory.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Remove '.' from the PATH environment variable in system profiles, and ensure the sudoers file uses absolute paths for all command specifications. Avoid running sudo from directories writable by untrusted users.

Fix this in Sudo Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing1.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
6.0 hours of engineering $1,090
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-1163 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2010-1163 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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