CVE-2010-3088
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 notify function in pidgin-knotify.c in the pidgin-knotify plugin 0.2.1 and earlier for Pidgin allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters in a message.
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 confidenceCommand injection vulnerability in the pidgin-knotify plugin allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands through shell metacharacters in messages. The notify function in pidgin-knotify.c fails to sanitize user-supplied input before passing it to shell execution.
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<= 0.2.1= 0.1= 0.1.2= 0.2.0CVSS 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
- High
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:H/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.
-
Check if pidgin-knotify plugin is installedSearch for the pidgin-knotify plugin files in the Pidgin plugin directory. On Linux, common paths include ~/.purple/plugins/ or /usr/lib/pidgin/. Look for files named pidgin-knotify, libknotify, or similar. On Windows, check the Pidgin plugins folder.Affected if The plugin file exists in the Pidgin plugin directory
-
Identify the plugin versionIf the plugin file is found, check its metadata or filename for version information. The affected versions are 0.1, 0.1.2, 0.2.0, and any version up to and including 0.2.1. Compare your installed version against this list.Affected if The installed version is 0.1, 0.1.2, 0.2.0, or any version <= 0.2.1
-
Verify the plugin is enabled in PidginOpen Pidgin, go to Tools > Plugins (or Preferences > Plugins on some versions). Check if 'Knotify' or 'Jianping Yu Knotify' appears in the list of loaded plugins and is checked/enabled.Affected if The plugin is listed as enabled in the Pidgin plugin manager
-
Confirm the vulnerable code path existsInspect the plugin file if possible. The vulnerability is in the notify function within pidgin-knotify.c, which passes unsanitized user input to shell execution. This specific code pattern is present in affected versions.Affected if The plugin binary originates from the vulnerable versions and contains the unsanitized shell execution code
You are affected if the pidgin-knotify plugin is installed, enabled, and its version matches 0.1, 0.1.2, 0.2.0, or any version up to 0.2.1.
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 the pidgin-knotify plugin to a version that properly sanitizes shell metacharacters, or disable the plugin until a patch is available. Network-level controls limiting who can send messages to the Pidgin instance provide additional defense-in-depth.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-3088 — 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-2010-3088 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