CVE-2010-1638
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 · uneditedThe IMP plugin in Horde allows remote attackers to bypass firewall restrictions and use Horde as a proxy to scan internal networks via a crafted request to an unspecified test script. NOTE: this is only a vulnerability when the administrator does not follow recommendations in the product's installation documentation.
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 confidenceThe IMP plugin for Horde contains test scripts that, when accessible, allow remote attackers to use the Horde server as a proxy to perform scans of internal networks. This SSRF (Server-Side Request Forgery)-like behavior exploits the server's network position to bypass firewall restrictions and reach internal systems. The vulnerability only exists when administrators fail to follow installation documentation recommendations regarding restriction of test scripts.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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.
-
Verify IMP plugin is installedLocate the IMP component within your Horde installation directory structureAffected if The IMP directory exists in your Horde web application folder
-
Identify test scripts in IMPSearch the IMP directory for test scripts (commonly named test.php or similar diagnostic files)Affected if Any test script files are present in the IMP plugin directory
-
Check web accessibility of test scriptsAttempt to access known test script paths via HTTP from an external host, or review web server configuration for allowed access to these filesAffected if Test scripts respond to web requests without authentication or IP-based restriction
-
Review web server access controlsExamine web server configuration (Apache .htaccess, nginx directives, or equivalent) for rules blocking or restricting access to IMP test scriptsAffected if No access control restrictions are configured for test script directories
-
Confirm IMP test functionalityIf test scripts are accessible, attempt to use them to make a request to an internal-only resource (such as localhost or internal IP) to verify SSRF capabilityAffected if The server can be coerced into making requests to internal network addresses through accessible test scripts
You are affected if the IMP plugin is installed and its test scripts are accessible via the web without proper access restrictions.
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 dataRemove or disable all test scripts in the IMP plugin installation, and ensure web server access controls follow the product's hardening guidelines.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,456.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-1638 — 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-2010-1638 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