XbuffyApplication · Debian
CVE-2014-0469
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 a certain Debian patch for xbuffy before 3.3.bl.3.dfsg-9 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via the subject of an email, possibly related to indent subject lines.
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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflow vulnerability in xbuffy mail filtering tool (Debian patch version before 3.3.bl.3.dfsg-9) allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via specially crafted email subject lines, likely due to improper bounds checking when indenting or processing subject line content.
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
XbuffyApplication
<= 3.3.bl.3.dfsg-8= 3.2.1-1= 3.2.1-2= 3.2.1-3= 3.2.1-4= 3.3-1= 3.3.b1.3-4= 3.3.bl.2-1= 3.3.bl.3-1= 3.3.bl.3-2= 3.3.bl.3-3= 3.3.bl.3-5CVSS 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.
-
Check if xbuffy is installedRun 'dpkg -l xbuffy' or 'apt list --installed 2>/dev/null | grep xbuffy' to see if the package is present on the systemAffected if xbuffy package is installed on the system
-
Determine installed xbuffy versionRun 'dpkg -s xbuffy' and look for the Version field in the output, or use 'apt show xbuffy' if installedAffected if The version shown is any of: 3.2.1-1, 3.2.1-2, 3.2.1-3, 3.2.1-4, 3.3-1, 3.3.b1.3-4, 3.3.bl.2-1, 3.3.bl.3-1, 3.3.bl.3-2, 3.3.bl.3-3, 3.3.bl.3-5, or any version <= 3.3.bl.3.dfsg-8
-
Verify xbuffy configuration existsCheck for xbuffy configuration files in typical locations such as ~/.xbuffy, /etc/xbuffy, or /etc/xbuffyrc, using 'find /etc -name "*xbuffy*" 2>/dev/null' and 'ls -la ~ | grep xbuffy'Affected if xbuffy configuration files exist, indicating the tool is configured for mail filtering
-
Confirm xbuffy process or service is activeRun 'ps aux | grep -i xbuffy' or check for cron jobs related to xbuffy with 'crontab -l 2>/dev/null | grep xbuffy' and 'ls /etc/cron.*/* 2>/dev/null | grep xbuffy'Affected if xbuffy is actively running as a process or scheduled to run, meaning it processes incoming mail and is vulnerable to specially crafted subject lines
You are affected if xbuffy is installed and the installed version is any version <= 3.3.bl.3.dfsg-8 (including the specific versions listed), and xbuffy is configured and processing mail.
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 xbuffy to version 3.3.bl.3.dfsg-9 or later which contains the corrected Debian patch, or implement input validation on email subject lines at the mail gateway to sanitize content before processing.
Fix this in Xbuffy
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-0469 — 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-2014-0469 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