CVE-2011-4201
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 · uneditedremote_support.cgi in the Tadasoft Restorepoint 3.2 evaluation image allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters in the (1) pid1 or (2) pid2 parameter in a stop_remote_support action.
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 confidenceCommand injection vulnerability in remote_support.cgi allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary OS commands via shell metacharacters in the pid1 or pid2 parameters during a stop_remote_support action. The affected CGI script fails to sanitize user-supplied input before passing it to a shell execution context.
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= 3.2CVSS 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
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:M/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.
-
Identify Restorepoint installationLocate the Restorepoint installation directory or check the system for Restorepoint software components. Look for files or services related to Restorepoint.Affected if Restorepoint software is present on the system
-
Verify installed versionCheck the installed Restorepoint version. Common methods include: reviewing installation logs, checking product metadata files, or querying the product's built-in version information.Affected if The version is exactly 3.2
-
Locate remote_support.cgiSearch for the remote_support.cgi script in the web server's CGI directories or document root. Common locations may include /cgi-bin/ or similar web-facing directories.Affected if The remote_support.cgi file exists in a web-accessible location
-
Confirm CGI is network accessibleAttempt to access the remote_support.cgi script via HTTP/HTTPS from the network to confirm it is exposed.Affected if The CGI script is reachable over the network via HTTP/HTTPS
-
Check for shell metacharacter filteringReview any available configuration or code for the remote_support.cgi to determine if input validation is applied to the pid1 and pid2 parameters.Affected if No input validation or filtering is implemented for shell metacharacters in pid1/pid2 parameters
A user is affected if they have Restorepoint version 3.2 with the remote_support.cgi script accessible over the network and lacking proper input sanitization on the pid1/pid2 parameters.
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 if available; if the software is unsupported, implement strict input validation to reject shell metacharacters in pid1/pid2 parameters or restrict network access to the remote_support.cgi interface.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-4201 — 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-2011-4201 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