CVE-2001-0599 in Adaptive Server Anywhere
Summary
by MITRE
Sybase Adaptive Server Anywhere Database Engine 6.0.3.2747 and earlier as included with Symantec Ghost 6.5 allows a remote attacker to create a denial of service by sending large (> 45Kb) amounts of data to port 2638.
Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 04/08/2019
The vulnerability identified as CVE-2001-0599 represents a critical denial of service weakness in the Sybase Adaptive Server Anywhere Database Engine version 6.0.3.2747 and earlier versions bundled with Symantec Ghost 6.5. This flaw manifests through an insufficient input validation mechanism that fails to properly handle large data payloads sent to the designated network port 2638. The vulnerability stems from the database engine's inability to process data exceeding 45 kilobytes in size, creating a condition where legitimate service operations can be disrupted through malicious data injection attacks. The affected system configuration specifically targets environments where Symantec Ghost 6.5 is deployed alongside the vulnerable database engine, making it particularly relevant for enterprise environments that rely on legacy imaging and deployment solutions.
The technical implementation of this vulnerability operates through a buffer overflow condition or memory exhaustion scenario within the database engine's data processing routines. When an attacker sends data packets larger than the defined 45 kilobyte threshold to port 2638, the system's memory allocation mechanisms become overwhelmed, leading to service disruption or complete system failure. This behavior aligns with CWE-122, which describes buffer overflow vulnerabilities where insufficient bounds checking allows attackers to write beyond allocated memory regions. The vulnerability's exploitation pathway follows the ATT&CK technique T1499.004, specifically targeting network denial of service through resource exhaustion attacks. The database engine's failure to implement proper input sanitization and size validation creates a predictable attack surface that remote adversaries can easily exploit without requiring elevated privileges or complex authentication mechanisms.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends beyond simple service disruption to potentially compromise entire enterprise deployment environments that depend on Symantec Ghost for system imaging and recovery operations. Organizations utilizing this vulnerable configuration face significant risks during critical maintenance windows or emergency recovery scenarios where system availability is paramount. The attack vector's remote nature means that adversaries can exploit this weakness from outside the network perimeter, making it particularly dangerous for organizations with limited network segmentation controls. The vulnerability's presence in the database engine component also suggests potential cascading effects on dependent applications and services that rely on the database for operational data, potentially creating broader system instability. Network monitoring systems may not immediately detect this attack pattern as it appears as normal data traffic until the service degradation becomes apparent, complicating incident response and forensic analysis efforts.
Mitigation strategies for CVE-2001-0599 should prioritize immediate patching of the affected Sybase Adaptive Server Anywhere database engine components to versions that properly validate input data sizes and implement appropriate memory management controls. Network administrators should implement firewall rules to restrict access to port 2638 from untrusted networks and consider implementing rate limiting or data size monitoring mechanisms to detect and prevent oversized data transfers. The implementation of network segmentation and access control lists can help minimize the attack surface by limiting direct exposure of the vulnerable service to external networks. Organizations should also consider implementing intrusion detection systems that can identify anomalous data patterns consistent with this vulnerability's exploitation characteristics. Additionally, regular vulnerability assessments and penetration testing should be conducted to identify similar input validation weaknesses in other database engines and network services. The remediation process must include thorough testing of patched systems to ensure that the vulnerability is properly resolved without introducing regressions in existing functionality. System administrators should also establish monitoring protocols that can detect service degradation patterns associated with this vulnerability to enable rapid incident response and recovery procedures.