CVE-2011-0344
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 · uneditedMultiple stack-based buffer overflows in unspecified CGI programs in the Unified Maintenance Tool web interface in the embedded web server in the Communication Server (CS) in Alcatel-Lucent OmniPCX Enterprise before R9.0 H1.301.50 allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via crafted HTTP headers.
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 confidenceMultiple stack-based buffer overflow vulnerabilities exist in unspecified CGI programs within the Unified Maintenance Tool web interface of Alcatel-Lucent OmniPCX Enterprise Communication Server. The flaws are exploitable remotely via crafted HTTP headers and allow arbitrary code execution. The affected versions are prior to R9.0 H1.301.50.
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<= 9.0= 5.0= 6.2= 7.0= 7.1= 8.0CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:A/AC:L/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 OmniPCX Enterprise versionAccess the Unified Maintenance Tool web interface (typically ports 8080 or 443) and locate the version information in the login page, footer, or admin panel. Alternatively, use the system command line interface to query the installed version.Affected if The version displayed is prior to R9.0 H1.301.50, or matches any of these: 5.0, 6.2, 7.0, 7.1, 8.0, or any 9.0 release below H1.301.50
-
Confirm Unified Maintenance Tool is enabledCheck the system configuration or service status to determine if the Unified Maintenance Tool CGI programs are currently active. This may be viewable through the web server configuration or administrative console.Affected if The Unified Maintenance Tool web interface is enabled and running
-
Verify network accessibility of web interfaceAttempt to access the Unified Maintenance Tool login page from a remote system or review firewall/network rules to determine if the web interface port is exposed to networks other than trusted admin networks.Affected if The web interface is reachable from untrusted or external networks
You are affected if the installed OmniPCX Enterprise version is prior to R9.0 H1.301.50 AND the Unified Maintenance Tool web interface is enabled and 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 Alcatel-Lucent OmniPCX Enterprise to version R9.0 H1.301.50 or later. If immediate patching is not feasible, consider network-level filtering to restrict unauthorized access to the web interface and disable the Unified Maintenance Tool if not required.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-0344 — 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-2011-0344 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