CVE-2011-1432
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 STARTTLS implementation in SCO SCOoffice Server does not properly restrict I/O buffering, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to insert commands into encrypted SMTP sessions by sending a cleartext command that is processed after TLS is in place, related to a "plaintext command injection" attack, a similar issue to CVE-2011-0411.
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 confidenceThe STARTTLS implementation in SCO SCOoffice Server fails to properly restrict I/O buffering during the transition from plaintext to encrypted SMTP sessions. A man-in-the-middle attacker can inject SMTP commands that get processed after TLS encryption is established, allowing plaintext command injection into supposedly encrypted sessions. This is due to the server processing buffered commands after the TLS handshake completes, a vulnerability similar to CVE-2011-0411.
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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/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.
-
Confirm SCOoffice Server installationCheck if SCOoffice Server is installed on the system by looking for its processes or binaries (e.g., running processes related to mail/SMTP services, or checking installation directories)Affected if SCOoffice Server is present on the system and provides SMTP services
-
Identify SMTP service configurationLocate the SMTP server configuration files for SCOoffice Server and examine the settings related to STARTTLS or TLS encryption for mail transportAffected if STARTTLS is enabled or available as an option in the SMTP configuration
-
Verify STARTTLS capabilityConnect to the SMTP port (typically 25) and issue the STARTTLS command to test if the server accepts STARTTLS negotiationAffected if The server responds with a successful STARTTLS ready message and initiates TLS handshake
-
Check for plaintext command injection windowSend SMTP commands immediately before or during the STARTTLS handshake and observe if commands are processed after the TLS connection is established (this may require packet capture or careful timing)Affected if Commands sent during the transition period are processed after TLS encryption is active, indicating the buffering vulnerability exists
If SCOoffice Server is installed and its SMTP service supports STARTTLS, the environment is likely affected since all versions of this product contain the vulnerable implementation.
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 for SCOoffice Server. If no patch is available, consider migrating to an updated mail server implementation or enforce TLS requirement at the connection level to reject connections that do not complete TLS negotiation before accepting commands.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-1432 — 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-2011-1432 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