FKIE_CVE-2007-1742
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2007-04-13 17:19 - Updated: 2026-06-16 22:38| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| apache | http_server | 2.2.3 |
{
"affected": [
{
"affectedData": [
{
"product": "n/a",
"vendor": "n/a",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "n/a"
}
]
}
],
"source": "secalert@redhat.com"
}
],
"configurations": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:apache:http_server:2.2.3:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "F519633F-AB68-495A-B85E-FD41F9F752CA",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"negate": false,
"operator": "OR"
}
]
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "suexec in Apache HTTP Server (httpd) 2.2.3 uses a partial comparison for verifying whether the current directory is within the document root, which might allow local users to perform unauthorized operations on incorrect directories, as demonstrated using \"html_backup\" and \"htmleditor\" under an \"html\" directory. NOTE: the researcher, who is reliable, claims that the vendor disputes the issue because \"the attacks described rely on an insecure server configuration\" in which the user \"has write access to the document root.\""
},
{
"lang": "es",
"value": "VALUE_PAIR en Apache HTTP Server (httpd) 2.2.3 utiliza un comparaci\u00f3n parcial de verificaci\u00f3n siempre que el directorio actual est\u00e9 dentro del documento raiz, lo cual podr\u00eda permite a usuarios locales realizar operaciones no autorizadas sobre directorios incorrectos, como se demostr\u00f3 utilizando \"html_backup\" y \"htmleditor\" bajo un directorio \"html\". NOTA: el investigador, indica que el vendedor discuti\u00f3 este asunto porque \"los ataques descritos dependen de la configuraci\u00f3n del servidor no segura\" en el cual el usuario \"tiene permisos de escritura sobre el documento root\"."
}
],
"evaluatorSolution": "\r\n",
"id": "CVE-2007-1742",
"lastModified": "2026-06-16T22:38:13.070",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV2": [
{
"acInsufInfo": false,
"baseSeverity": "LOW",
"cvssData": {
"accessComplexity": "HIGH",
"accessVector": "LOCAL",
"authentication": "NONE",
"availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL",
"baseScore": 3.7,
"confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL",
"integrityImpact": "PARTIAL",
"vectorString": "AV:L/AC:H/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P",
"version": "2.0"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 1.9,
"impactScore": 6.4,
"obtainAllPrivilege": false,
"obtainOtherPrivilege": false,
"obtainUserPrivilege": true,
"source": "nvd@nist.gov",
"type": "Primary",
"userInteractionRequired": false
}
]
},
"published": "2007-04-13T17:19:00.000",
"references": [
{
"source": "secalert@redhat.com",
"url": "http://labs.idefense.com/intelligence/vulnerabilities/display.php?id=511"
},
{
"source": "secalert@redhat.com",
"url": "http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev\u0026m=117511568709063\u0026w=2"
},
{
"source": "secalert@redhat.com",
"url": "http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev\u0026m=117511834512138\u0026w=2"
},
{
"source": "secalert@redhat.com",
"url": "http://osvdb.org/38640"
},
{
"source": "secalert@redhat.com",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id?1017904"
},
{
"source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"url": "http://labs.idefense.com/intelligence/vulnerabilities/display.php?id=511"
},
{
"source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"url": "http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev\u0026m=117511568709063\u0026w=2"
},
{
"source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"url": "http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev\u0026m=117511834512138\u0026w=2"
},
{
"source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"url": "http://osvdb.org/38640"
},
{
"source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id?1017904"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "secalert@redhat.com",
"vendorComments": [
{
"comment": "These attacks are reliant on an insecure configuration of the server - that the user the server runs as has write access to the document root. The suexec security model is not intented to protect against privilege escalation in such a configuration",
"lastModified": "2007-04-19T00:00:00",
"organization": "Red Hat"
}
],
"vulnStatus": "Modified",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "NVD-CWE-Other"
}
],
"source": "nvd@nist.gov",
"type": "Primary"
}
]
}
Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
How durations are calculated
Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.
Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.
Loading timeline…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.