CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2002-0485

Improper Handling of Case Sensitivity

Published: Aug 12, 2002 | Modified: Feb 02, 2024
CVSS 3.x
7.5
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
CVSS 2.x
5 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

Norton Anti-Virus (NAV) allows remote attackers to bypass content filtering via attachments whose Content-Type and Content-Disposition headers are mixed upper and lower case, which is ignored by some mail clients.

Weakness

The product does not properly account for differences in case sensitivity when accessing or determining the properties of a resource, leading to inconsistent results.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Norton_antivirus Symantec * *

Extended Description

Improperly handled case sensitive data can lead to several possible consequences, including:

Potential Mitigations

  • Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
  • When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
  • Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.

References