CVE-2010-4553
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 · uneditedAn unspecified Domino API in IBM Lotus Notes Traveler before 8.5.1.1 does not properly handle MIME types, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via unspecified vectors.
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 vulnerability exists in an unspecified Domino API within IBM Lotus Notes Traveler versions prior to 8.5.1.1. The API does not properly handle MIME types, allowing remote attackers to send specially crafted requests that cause the Lotus Notes Traveler daemon to crash, resulting in denial of service.
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<= 8.5.0.2= 8.0= 8.0.1= 8.0.1.2= 8.0.1.3= 8.5.0.0= 8.5.0.1CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/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 if IBM Lotus Notes Traveler is installedCheck for the presence of the Lotus Notes Traveler service on the system or look for its installation directory in the program files location. On Windows, verify if the 'Lotus Notes Traveler' service exists.Affected if The service is not present on the system, the product is not installed.
-
Determine the installed version of Lotus Notes TravelerLocate the version information for the installed Lotus Notes Traveler instance. This may be found in the Windows registry under the IBM Lotus Notes Traveler key, or by examining the executable or installation logs. The version format follows the pattern X.X.X.X (such as 8.5.0.1).Affected if Unable to determine the version, assume it may be affected.
-
Compare the installed version against the affected version listCheck if the installed version matches any of these: versions 8.0, 8.0.1, 8.0.1.2, 8.0.1.3, 8.5.0.0, 8.5.0.1, or any version 8.5.0.2 or lower.Affected if The installed version is 8.5.0.2 or lower, or specifically matches 8.0, 8.0.1, 8.0.1.2, 8.0.1.3, 8.5.0.0, or 8.5.0.1.
-
Verify if the Traveler service is network accessibleConfirm that the Lotus Notes Traveler service is running and listening on network ports. The vulnerability is exploitable remotely through specially crafted HTTP requests containing malicious MIME types.Affected if The service is exposed to network requests and the version is in the affected list.
The environment is affected if IBM Lotus Notes Traveler is installed with a version of 8.5.0.2 or lower (including 8.0.x, 8.0.1.x, and 8.5.0.0-8.5.0.1), and the service is network accessible.
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 IBM Lotus Notes Traveler to version 8.5.1.1 or later to resolve the MIME type handling vulnerability. If immediate patching is not possible, consider network segmentation to limit exposure to untrusted networks.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-4553 — 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-2010-4553 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