CVE-2014-0475
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 · uneditedMultiple directory traversal vulnerabilities in GNU C Library (aka glibc or libc6) before 2.20 allow context-dependent attackers to bypass ForceCommand restrictions and possibly have other unspecified impact via a .. (dot dot) in a (1) LC_*, (2) LANG, or other locale environment variable.
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 confidenceDirectory traversal vulnerability in GNU C Library (glibc) allows context-dependent attackers to bypass ForceCommand restrictions via '..' in locale environment variables (LC_*, LANG, or other locale variables) before version 2.20.
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<= 2.19= 2.0= 2.0.1= 2.0.2= 2.0.3= 2.0.4= 2.0.5= 2.0.6= 2.1= 2.1.1= 2.1.1.6= 2.1.2CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Determine installed glibc versionRun 'ldd --version' to obtain the glibc version number, or use 'rpm -q glibc' on RHEL/CentOS, or 'dpkg -l libc6' on Debian/UbuntuAffected if Version is 2.19 or lower, or matches any of the specific 2.0.x or 2.1.x versions listed in affected products (2.0 through 2.1.2)
-
Check for ForceCommand usage in SSHSearch SSH configuration files (typically /etc/ssh/sshd_config) for 'ForceCommand' directives or 'Match' blocks that enforce restricted command executionAffected if ForceCommand is configured and enforced in the SSH daemon configuration
-
Identify applications using restricted command executionAudit services or applications that execute commands in a restricted context (such as Git hooks, scp, sftp, or other subsystems that use ForceCommand or similar mechanisms) and accept user-controlled environment variablesAffected if Services execute restricted commands while allowing locale environment variables (LC_*, LANG, etc.) to be passed through
You are affected if your glibc version is 2.19 or lower (or matches the listed 2.0.x/2.1.x versions) AND you use ForceCommand or similar command restriction mechanisms that can be bypassed via '..' in locale environment variables
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 dataUpdate glibc to version 2.20 or later to patch the vulnerability. This is a system library update that may require system restart to take effect.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-0475 — 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-2014-0475 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