CVE-2011-0975
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 · uneditedStack-based buffer overflow in BMC PATROL Agent Service Daemon for in Performance Analysis for Servers, Performance Assurance for Servers, and Performance Assurance for Virtual Servers 7.4.00 through 7.5.10; Performance Analyzer and Performance Predictor for Servers 7.4.00 through 7.5.10; and Capacity Management Essentials 1.2.00 (7.4.15) allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted length value in a BGS_MULTIPLE_READS command to TCP port 6768.
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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflow in BMC PATROL Agent Service Daemon on TCP port 6768 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted length value in a BGS_MULTIPLE_READS command. This is a critical remote code execution vulnerability affecting multiple BMC Performance products versions 7.4.00-7.5.10 and Capacity Management Essentials 1.2.00.
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= 7.4.00= 7.4.10= 7.4.15= 7.5.00= 7.5.10= 7.4.00= 7.4.10= 7.4.15= 7.5.00= 7.5.10= 7.4.00= 7.4.10= 7.4.15= 7.5.00= 7.5.10= 7.4.00= 7.4.10= 7.4.15= 7.5.00= 7.5.10= 7.4.00= 7.4.10= 7.4.15= 7.5.00= 7.5.10= 1.2.00CVSS 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 PATROL Agent Service is running on port 6768Run 'netstat -an | grep 6768' or 'ss -tlnp | grep 6768' to check if TCP port 6768 is listeningAffected if Port 6768 is listening and bound to a BMC PATROL service process
-
Identify the installed BMC product and versionCheck installed software inventory, registry, or run product-specific version command. Common locations: check installation directory for version files, or use 'wmic product get name,version' on Windows, or query RPM/DPKG packages on LinuxAffected if The installed product is one of: BMC Performance Analysis For Servers, BMC Performance Assurance For Servers, BMC Performance Assurance For Virtual Servers, BMC Performance Analyzer For Servers, BMC Performance Predictor For Servers, or BMC Capacity Management Essentials
-
Compare installed version against affected versionsMatch the identified version to the affected list: 7.4.00, 7.4.10, 7.4.15, 7.5.00, 7.5.10 (for Performance products) or 1.2.00 (for Capacity Management Essentials)Affected if The installed version exactly matches one of these: 7.4.00, 7.4.10, 7.4.15, 7.5.00, 7.5.10, or 1.2.00
You are affected if the BMC PATROL Agent Service is listening on TCP port 6768 and the installed product version exactly matches 7.4.00, 7.4.10, 7.4.15, 7.5.00, 7.5.10, or 1.2.00.
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 vendor patches or upgrade to supported versions; if patches unavailable, restrict network access to port 6768 via firewall or disable the service until remediation is possible.
- 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-2011-0975 — 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-2011-0975 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