CVE-2013-4742
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 · uneditedBuffer overflow in NetWin SurgeFTP before 23d2 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a long string within the authentication request.
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 confidenceBuffer overflow in NetWin SurgeFTP's authentication request processing allows remote attackers to send a specially crafted authentication request containing an excessively long string. This overflow can corrupt memory, potentially enabling arbitrary code execution or causing the service to crash.
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<= 2.3b1= 2.0c= 2.0d= 2.0e= 2.0f= 2.2k1= 2.2k3= 2.2m1= 2.3a1= 2.3a2= 2.3a6= 2.3a7CVSS 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/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.
-
Verify SurgeFTP installationCheck if NetWin SurgeFTP is installed on the system by looking for SurgeFTP processes or installation directories.Affected if SurgeFTP is found running on the system
-
Determine installed SurgeFTP versionLocate and read the SurgeFTP version information, typically found in the software or its service banner.Affected if The installed version cannot be determined or is not clearly displayed
-
Compare version against affected listCompare your installed version to the affected versions: <= 2.3b1, 2.0c, 2.0d, 2.0e, 2.0f, 2.2k1, 2.2k3, 2.2m1, 2.3a1, 2.3a2, 2.3a6, 2.3a7Affected if The installed version matches any version in the affected list
-
Confirm network exposure of FTP serviceCheck if the SurgeFTP service is listening on network ports and accessible from external sources.Affected if The FTP service is exposed to untrusted networks and the version is affected
The environment is affected if SurgeFTP is installed with a version matching any entry in the affected versions list and the service is network-accessible.
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 dataUpgrade to SurgeFTP version 23d2 or later to obtain the security patch. Until the upgrade is completed, restrict network exposure of the FTP service and monitor for anomalous authentication attempts.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-4742 — 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-2013-4742 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