DpkgApplication · Debian
CVE-2010-1679
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 · uneditedDirectory traversal vulnerability in dpkg-source in dpkg before 1.14.31 and 1.15.x allows user-assisted remote attackers to modify arbitrary files via directory traversal sequences in a patch for a source-format 3.0 package.
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 confidenceDirectory traversal vulnerability in dpkg-source allows attackers to write files to arbitrary filesystem locations through specially crafted patches in source-format 3.0 packages. The attacker embeds directory traversal sequences (like ../) in a patch file, and when a user processes the malicious source package, files are written outside the intended build directory.
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
DpkgApplication
<= 1.14.30= 1.9.19= 1.9.20= 1.9.21= 1.10= 1.10.1= 1.10.2= 1.10.3= 1.10.4= 1.10.5= 1.10.6= 1.10.7CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
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 dpkg versionRun 'dpkg --version' or 'dpkg-query -W dpkg' to obtain the exact version number of the installed dpkg packageAffected if The version is 1.14.30 or lower, or matches one of the specific affected versions: 1.9.19, 1.9.20, 1.9.21, 1.10.x (through 1.10.7)
-
Verify dpkg-source availabilityRun 'which dpkg-source' or 'dpkg-source --version' to confirm the dpkg-source command is present on the systemAffected if dpkg-source is installed and the version from step 1 is in the affected range
-
Check for source-format 3.0 package handlingLook for .dsc source package files on the system, particularly in build directories or package extraction locations; inspect the 'Format' field in any .dsc file to determine if it specifies '3.0 (quilt)','3.0 (native)' or similar 3.0 formatAffected if Source packages using format 3.0 are processed with a vulnerable dpkg-source version
You are affected if your installed dpkg version falls within the affected ranges AND you process or extract source-format 3.0 packages using dpkg-source.
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 dataUpdate dpkg to version 1.14.31 or later to patch the vulnerable code. Alternatively, apply vendor-supplied security patches for affected dpkg versions. Review source package handling processes and consider verifying source package integrity before extraction.
Fix this in Dpkg
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-1679 — 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-2010-1679 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