CVE-2010-2791
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 · uneditedmod_proxy in httpd in Apache HTTP Server 2.2.9, when running on Unix, does not close the backend connection if a timeout occurs when reading a response from a persistent connection, which allows remote attackers to obtain a potentially sensitive response intended for a different client in opportunistic circumstances via a normal HTTP request. NOTE: this is the same issue as CVE-2010-2068, but for a different OS and set of affected versions.
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 confidenceIn Apache HTTP Server 2.2.9 on Unix, mod_proxy fails to close backend connections when a timeout occurs while reading a response from a persistent (keep-alive) connection. This leaves the connection in the pool with potentially sensitive response data from a previous request, which can be leaked to subsequent unrelated clients through normal HTTP requests.
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= 2.2.9CVSS 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 Apache HTTP Server versionRun 'httpd -v' or 'apache2 -v' to determine the installed Apache versionAffected if The installed version is exactly 2.2.9
-
Verify mod_proxy module is loadedRun 'httpd -M' or 'apache2ctl -M' and search for 'proxy_module' in the output, or check config files for 'LoadModule proxy_module'Affected if mod_proxy is loaded and available
-
Confirm proxy configuration existsSearch configuration files (httpd.conf, include files) for any ProxyPass, ProxyPassReverse, or other proxy-related directivesAffected if Proxy configuration is present and mod_proxy is in use
-
Check for keep-alive backend connectionsInspect proxy configuration for 'ProxyKeepAlive On' directive or verify that the backend supports persistent connectionsAffected if Keep-alive is enabled for backend connections (default behavior when not explicitly disabled)
You are affected if you are running Apache HTTP Server 2.2.9 with mod_proxy enabled and configured to proxy requests to backends using keep-alive connections.
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 Apache HTTP Server to a version that includes the fix for this vulnerability, or apply the relevant vendor patch. Consider disabling backend connection pooling as a temporary workaround if upgrade is not immediately feasible.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-2791 — 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- www.mandriva.com
- www.openwall.com
- www.oracle.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.securityfocus.com
- exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- nvd.nist.gov
Practitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2010-2791 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