CVE-2011-4144
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 · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in EMC Documentum Content Server 6.0, 6.5 before SP2 P02, 6.5 SP3 before SP3 P02, and 6.6 before P02 allows local users to obtain "highest super user privileges" by leveraging system administrator privileges.
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 confidenceLocal privilege escalation vulnerability in EMC Documentum Content Server allows authenticated system administrators to obtain highest superuser privileges. The vulnerability affects versions 6.0, 6.5 before SP2 P02, 6.5 SP3 before SP3 P02, and 6.6 before P02.
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= 6.0= 6.5= 6.6= 6CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/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.
-
Identify Documentum Content Server versionQuery the Content Server version through the dm_mgmt_get_server_version API or check the version property in the server's installation directory. On Linux, this may also be accessible via the 'dmversion' command or by inspecting the Content Server installation logs and version files.Affected if The installed version is 6.0, 6.5 (any patch before SP2 P02), 6.5 SP3 (any patch before SP3 P02), or 6.6 (any patch before P02)
-
Confirm running as authenticated system administratorVerify that the account being used to interact with Content Server has system administrator privileges (dm_server_anager or superuser role). Check user roles via the dm_User object or administrative console.Affected if The account has authenticated system administrator access to the Content Server
-
Check for superuser privilege escalation pathInspect whether the Content Server allows privilege escalation to superuser (dm_superuser) through the administrative APIs or configuration. This may be observable in audit logs or through attempts to acquire superuser session.Affected if An authenticated administrator can obtain superuser privileges beyond their assigned role level
-
Verify operating system version if on CentOSRun 'cat /etc/centos-release' or 'cat /etc/redhat-release' to confirm the OS version if Documentum is hosted on CentOS 6.Affected if The underlying OS is CentOS 6 and the Documentum version falls within the affected ranges above
You are affected if your EMC Documentum Content Server version is 6.0, 6.5 before SP2 P02, 6.5 SP3 before SP3 P02, or 6.6 before P02, and you have authenticated system administrators who could escalate to superuser privileges.
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 appropriate vendor patch (SP2 P02 for 6.5, SP3 P02 for 6.5 SP3, or P02 for 6.6) during a planned maintenance window after backing up the system.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-4144 — 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-2011-4144 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