CVE-2011-0714
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 · uneditedUse-after-free vulnerability in a certain Red Hat patch for the RPC server sockets functionality in the Linux kernel 2.6.32 on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 6 might allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) via malformed data in a packet, related to lockd and the svc_xprt_received function.
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 confidenceUse-after-free vulnerability in the RPC server sockets implementation in Linux kernel 2.6.32 as shipped in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6. The flaw exists in the lockd module's svc_xprt_received function and can be triggered by sending malformed data in a network packet to the RPC service, leading to a denial of service (system crash).
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= 2.6.32= 6.0CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Complete
AV:A/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C
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 installed kernel versionRun 'uname -r' or check /proc/version to identify the running kernel versionAffected if The kernel version is exactly 2.6.32 (e.g., 2.6.32-xxx.el6)
-
Verify Red Hat Enterprise Linux versionRun 'cat /etc/redhat-release' to confirm the OS is RHEL 6.xAffected if The system is running RHEL 6.0 with kernel 2.6.32
-
Determine if lockd module is loadedRun 'lsmod | grep lockd' to check if the lockd kernel module is currently loadedAffected if The lockd module is loaded and active
-
Check if RPC services are exposedRun 'rpcinfo -p' or check if port 2049/TCP (NFS) and lockd ports are listeningAffected if RPC services (especially NFS using lockd) are running and network-accessible
You are affected if running RHEL 6.0 with kernel 2.6.32, the lockd module is loaded, and RPC/NFS services are active and reachable on the network.
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 dataApply the relevant Red Hat kernel security update for CVE-2011-0714. If immediate patching is not feasible, consider restricting network access to RPC services (port 2049/TCP and lockd ports) at the firewall level to reduce attack surface until patching can be completed.
- 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-2011-0714 — 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-2011-0714 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