CVE-2015-2126
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 pppoec in HP HP-UX 11iv2 and 11iv3 allows local users to gain privileges by leveraging setuid permissions.
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 the pppoec binary on HP-UX 11iv2 and 11iv3. The pppoec binary has setuid permissions that allow a local user to execute it and gain elevated (root) privileges by exploiting unspecified flaws in how the binary handles privileges when invoked.
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= 11.11iv2= 11.11iv3CVSS 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
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:L/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.
-
Verify HP-UX versionRun 'uname -a' or 'swlist -l bundle' to identify the HP-UX version. Confirm it is 11.11iv2 or 11.11iv3.Affected if The system is running HP-UX 11.11iv2 or 11.11iv3.
-
Locate the pppoec binaryCheck if the pppoec binary exists on the system, typically in /usr/sbin/pppoec or via 'find / -name pppoec -type f 2>/dev/null'.Affected if The pppoec binary is present on the system.
-
Check setuid permissions on pppoecRun 'ls -la /usr/sbin/pppoec' or 'ls -la $(find / -name pppoec -type f 2>/dev/null)' to inspect file permissions. Look for the 's' in the owner execute field (e.g., '-rwsr-xr-x').Affected if The pppoec binary has the setuid bit set (owner permissions show 's' or 'S' instead of 'x').
-
Verify binary ownershipCheck the owner of the pppoec binary using 'ls -la'. The binary should be owned by root for the setuid vulnerability to enable privilege escalation.Affected if The pppoec binary is owned by root and has setuid permissions.
The system is affected if it runs HP-UX 11.11iv2 or 11.11iv3 and contains the pppoec binary with root ownership and setuid permissions enabled.
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 dataRemove the setuid bit from the pppoec binary (chmod -s /usr/sbin/pppoec) if PPPoE functionality is not required, or apply HP patches if available. If PPPoE is required, restrict execution to authorized users via file permissions.
- 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-2015-2126 — 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-2015-2126 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