CVE-2011-0922
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 client in HP Data Protector allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary programs via an EXEC_SETUP command that references a UNC share pathname.
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 confidenceHP Data Protector client contains a remote code execution vulnerability where the EXEC_SETUP command accepts a UNC share pathname, allowing remote attackers to point to and execute arbitrary programs from a network location.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/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.
-
Verify HP Data Protector installationCheck for the presence of HP Data Protector by looking for the installation directory (typically C:\Program Files\OmniBack or C:\Program Files\HP\Data Protector) and the OmniBack service in Windows Services or the omnib command on Linux/Unix systems.Affected if HP Data Protector software is found installed on the system
-
Confirm Data Protector client service is runningCheck if the HP Data Protector client service (commonly named 'HP Data Protector Client' or 'OmniBack Client') is running. On Windows, run 'services.msc' and look for the service. On Unix/Linux, run 'omnistat -version' or check for running processes containing 'omnib' or 'dp' in the name.Affected if The HP Data Protector client service is running and active
-
Check if the management port is exposedVerify if port 5555 (default HP Data Protector client port) is listening. On Windows, run 'netstat -an | findstr 5555'. On Linux/Unix, run 'netstat -an | grep 5555' or 'ss -tlnp | grep 5555'.Affected if Port 5555 is open and listening for connections
-
Test for vulnerable EXEC_SETUP command accessibilityUsing a network tool like netcat or telnet, attempt to connect to the Data Protector port (5555) and send a raw command probe to verify if the service accepts commands. This can be done with: echo -e "\x00\x00\x00\x00" | nc -v target 5555 or by checking if the service responds to initial connection handshake.Affected if The Data Protector service accepts network connections and responds to protocol commands without authentication enforcement
If HP Data Protector client is installed, running, and exposing port 5555 to the network, the environment is affected by CVE-2011-2012 since all versions of this product contain the vulnerability.
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 vendor-supplied patch or upgrade to a fixed version of HP Data Protector; restrict network access to Data Protector ports and disable UNC path handling in untrusted environments.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing16.0 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 $8,576.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-0922 — 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-2011-0922 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