| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 6.6 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in Infopulse GateKeeper 3.5. This affects an unknown part. Performing a manipulation results in memory corruption. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2000-0675. Furthermore, an exploit is available. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component.
Details
A vulnerability was found in Infopulse GateKeeper 3.5. It has been classified as critical. This affects an unknown functionality. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a memory corruption vulnerability. CWE is classifying the issue as CWE-119. The product performs operations on a memory buffer, but it can read from or write to a memory location that is outside of the intended boundary of the buffer. This is going to have an impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
Buffer overflow in Infopulse Gatekeeper 3.5 and earlier allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via a long string.
The bug was discovered 07/13/2000. The weakness was published 07/13/2000 (Website). The advisory is shared at xforce.iss.net. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2000-0675. The exploitability is told to be easy. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. No form of authentication is needed for exploitation. Technical details are unknown but a public exploit is available.
The exploit is shared for download at securityfocus.com. It is declared as proof-of-concept. The commercial vulnerability scanner Qualys is able to test this issue with plugin 86186 (Infopulse Gatekeeper Buffer Overflow Vulnerability).
Upgrading to version 3.6 eliminates this vulnerability.
The vulnerability is also documented in the databases at X-Force (4948), Exploit-DB (20074), SecurityFocus (BID 1477†), OSVDB (1466†) and Vulnerability Center (SBV-6699†). If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Vendor
Name
Version
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 7.3VulDB Meta Temp Score: 6.6
VulDB Base Score: 7.3
VulDB Temp Score: 6.6
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Memory corruptionCWE: CWE-119
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔍
Access: Public
Status: Proof-of-Concept
Download: 🔍
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Qualys ID: 🔍
Qualys Name: 🔍
Exploit-DB: 🔍
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: UpgradeStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Upgrade: GateKeeper 3.6
Timeline
07/13/2000 🔍07/13/2000 🔍
07/13/2000 🔍
07/13/2000 🔍
07/13/2000 🔍
01/02/2005 🔍
06/25/2014 🔍
10/13/2025 🔍
Sources
Advisory: xforce.iss.netStatus: Confirmed
CVE: CVE-2000-0675 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2000-0675
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-15765
X-Force: 4948
SecurityFocus: 1477 - Infopulse Gatekeeper Buffer Overflow Vulnerability
OSVDB: 1466 - Infopulse - Gatekeeper - Buffer Overflow Vulnerability
Vulnerability Center: 6699 - Buffer Overflow in Infopulse GateKeeper 3.5 Allows Code Execution, High
scip Labs: https://www.scip.ch/en/?labs.20161013
Entry
Created: 06/25/2014 15:30Updated: 10/13/2025 02:35
Changes: 06/25/2014 15:30 (59), 06/03/2019 06:52 (4), 05/02/2025 23:23 (19), 10/13/2025 02:35 (2)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.