Tor 0.2.0.28, and probably 0.2.0.34 and earlier, allows remote attackers, with control of an entry router and an exit router, to confirm tha
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 21/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 2.3% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 83.4% of all records.
- Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
- According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.
Low priority for now. Update when a fix is released; follow the vendor's advisory.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Tor 0.2.0.28, and probably 0.2.0.34 and earlier, allows remote attackers, with control of an entry router and an exit router, to confirm that a sender and receiver are communicating via vectors involving (1) replaying, (2) modifying, (3) inserting, or (4) deleting a single cell, and then observing cell recognition errors at the exit router. NOTE: the vendor disputes the significance of this issue, noting that the product's design "accepted end-to-end correlation as an attack that is too expensive to solve."
- Published
- Feb 20, 2009
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 2.4% · 83th percentile
- CWE
- —
Report tools
Action score
21
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 20 / 40 · 5.1 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 1 / 30 · 2.4%
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- No fixed version yet
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| tor | tor | cpe:2.3:a:tor:tor |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- tor torup to 0.2.0.34 inclusive
- tor tor0.2.0.1
- tor tor0.2.0.10
- tor tor0.2.0.11
- tor tor0.2.0.12
- tor tor0.2.0.13
- tor tor0.2.0.14
- tor tor0.2.0.15
- tor tor0.2.0.16
- tor tor0.2.0.17
- tor tor0.2.0.18
- tor tor0.2.0.19
- tor tor0.2.0.2
- tor tor0.2.0.20
- tor tor0.2.0.21
- tor tor0.2.0.22
- tor tor0.2.0.23
- tor tor0.2.0.24
- tor tor0.2.0.25
- tor tor0.2.0.26
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian:12 | tor | all versions | — |
Same product
tor: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2010-1676Heap-based buffer overflow in Tor before 0.2.1.28 and 0.2.2.x before 0.2.2.20-alpha allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (da42Plan
- CVE-2009-0939Tor before 0.2.0.34 treats incomplete IPv4 addresses as valid, which has unknown impact and attack vectors related to "Spec conformance," as41Plan
- CVE-2009-0414Unspecified vulnerability in Tor before 0.2.0.33 has unspecified impact and remote attack vectors that trigger heap corruption.41Plan
- CVE-2008-5398Tor before 0.2.0.32 does not properly process the ClientDNSRejectInternalAddresses configuration option in situations where an exit relay is38Monitor
- CVE-2011-2778Multiple heap-based buffer overflows in Tor before 0.2.2.35 allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory corruption) or possi31Monitor
- CVE-2006-3409Integer overflow in Tor before 0.1.1.20 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via crafted large inputs, which result in a buffer31Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
The product’s vendor appears in a public program. Matched by name; verify the scope text in the program.
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- P · data can be read
- Integrity
- P · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- P · the service can be disrupted
- Attack complexity
- High
- Confidentiality impact
- P
- Integrity impact
- P
- Availability impact
- P
Weakness class (CWE)
—
CVSS vector
AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
MITRE has no CAPEC/ATT&CK mapping for this CWE.
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
Show all references (1 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.