| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 7.2 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in Cisco PGW 2200 Softswitch up to 9.x. The affected element is an unknown function. The manipulation leads to input validation. This vulnerability is listed as CVE-2010-0601. There is no available exploit. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.
Details
A vulnerability was found in Cisco PGW 2200 Softswitch up to 9.x and classified as critical. This issue affects some unknown processing. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a input validation vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-20. The product receives input or data, but it does
not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the
properties that are required to process the data safely and
correctly. Impacted is availability. The summary by CVE is:
The MGCP implementation on the Cisco PGW 2200 Softswitch with software before 9.7(3)S11 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device crash) via a malformed packet, aka Bug ID CSCsl39126.
The weakness was presented 05/13/2010 with Cisco (Website). The advisory is shared at cisco.com. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2010-0601. The exploitation is known to be easy. The attack may be initiated remotely. No form of authentication is needed for a successful exploitation. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available.
Upgrading to version 9.7%283%29s9 eliminates this vulnerability. A possible mitigation has been published immediately after the disclosure of the vulnerability.
The vulnerability is also documented in the databases at X-Force (58507), SecurityFocus (BID 40117†), OSVDB (64680†) and Vulnerability Center (SBV-25751†). See VDB-53223, VDB-53222, VDB-53221 and VDB-53220 for similar entries. If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Vendor
Name
Version
License
Website
- Vendor: https://www.cisco.com/
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 7.5VulDB Meta Temp Score: 7.2
VulDB Base Score: 7.5
VulDB Temp Score: 7.2
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: Input validationCWE: CWE-20
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: UpgradeStatus: 🔍
Reaction Time: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Exposure Time: 🔍
Upgrade: PGW 2200 Softswitch 9.7%283%29s9
Timeline
02/10/2010 🔍05/12/2010 🔍
05/12/2010 🔍
05/13/2010 🔍
05/13/2010 🔍
05/13/2010 🔍
05/14/2010 🔍
05/17/2010 🔍
03/19/2015 🔍
09/13/2021 🔍
Sources
Vendor: cisco.comAdvisory: cisco.com
Organization: Cisco
Status: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2010-0601 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2010-0601
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-53213
X-Force: 58507
SecurityFocus: 40117 - Cisco PGW 2200 Softswitch MGCP Packets Denial of Service Vulnerability
OSVDB: 64680 - Cisco PGW 2200 MGCP Packet Handling DoS
Vulnerability Center: 25751 - [cisco-sa-20100512-pgw] Cisco PGW 2200 Softswitch Remote DoS Vulnerability via a Malformed Packet, High
See also: 🔍
Entry
Created: 03/19/2015 12:22Updated: 09/13/2021 14:54
Changes: 03/19/2015 12:22 (54), 02/24/2017 11:05 (9), 09/13/2021 14:54 (3)
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.