CVE-2010-4764
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 · uneditedOpen Ticket Request System (OTRS) before 2.4.10, and 3.x before 3.0.3, does not present warnings about incoming encrypted e-mail messages that were based on revoked PGP or GPG keys, which makes it easier for remote attackers to spoof e-mail communication by leveraging a key that has a revocation signature.
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 confidenceOTRS failed to validate or warn users about incoming encrypted email messages that were signed with revoked PGP or GPG keys. When a key had been revoked (meaning it should no longer be trusted), the system would still accept and display the encrypted content without alerting the user, allowing remote attackers to spoof email communications using compromised or revoked cryptographic keys.
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= 3.0.0= 3.0.1= 3.0.2<= 2.4.9= 0.5= 1.0= 1.0.0= 1.0.1= 1.0.2= 1.1= 1.1.0= 1.1.1CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/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.
-
Determine OTRS versionCheck the version file in your OTRS installation (typically in /opt/otrs/Kernel/Config.pm or check the OTRS admin interface under 'System Administration' > 'System Information')Affected if The installed version is 3.0.0, 3.0.1, 3.0.2, 2.4.9 or earlier, or one of the older versions (0.5, 1.0, 1.0.0, 1.1.0, 1.1.1, etc.)
-
Verify PGP or GPG encryption is enabledLog into OTRS admin panel and navigate to 'Admin' > 'PGP' or 'GPG' settings, or inspect the Kernel/Config.pm file for PGP or GPG-related configuration options (such as $Self->{'PGP'} or $Self->{'GPG'})Affected if PGP or GPG support is enabled and configured for incoming email processing
-
Confirm incoming encrypted email processingCheck your OTRS email receive configuration in 'Admin' > 'PostMaster' or by examining the PostMasterFilter settings in Kernel/Config.pm to see if encrypted emails are being processedAffected if Incoming email is configured to decrypt and display PGP/GPG encrypted content
-
Test revocation warning behaviorSend a test encrypted email signed with a known revoked GPG/PGP key to your OTRS system and observe whether any warning or error is displayed about the revoked keyAffected if The system displays the encrypted content without warning about the revoked key status
You are affected if your OTRS version is within the affected ranges and you have PGP/GPG encryption enabled for processing incoming email, because the system will not warn about revoked keys.
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 OTRS to version 2.4.10 or 3.0.3 or later where the issue is fixed. For systems that cannot be immediately upgraded, implement manual verification procedures for sensitive encrypted communications and regularly review key revocation status.
- 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-2010-4764 — 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-2010-4764 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