DeleGate 9.9.13 allows local users to gain privileges as demonstrated by the dgcpnod setuid program.
- Published
- Jan 15, 2020
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 1.3% · 69th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-269
Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.
Report tools
Action score
31
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 31 / 40 · 7.8 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 1.3%
Affected systems
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| delegate | delegate | cpe:2.3:a:delegate:delegate |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- delegate delegate9.9.13
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (redhat). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology DeleGate
- 9.9.13affected
Same product
delegate: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2004-2003Buffer overflow in the ssl_prcert function in the SSLway filter (sslway.c) for DeleGate 8.9.2 and earlier allows remote attackers to execute32Monitor
- CVE-2001-1202Cross-site scripting vulnerability in DeleGate 7.7.0 and 7.7.1 does not quote scripting commands within a "403 Forbidden" error page, which 32Monitor
- CVE-2005-0861Multiple buffer overflows in DeleGate before 8.11.1 may allow attackers to cause a denial of service or execute arbitrary code, possibly due31Monitor
- CVE-2002-1781Multiple buffer overflows in DeleGate 7.7.0 through 7.8.1 allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code, as demonstrated using a long USE31Monitor
- CVE-2006-2072Multiple unspecified vulnerabilities in DeleGate 9.x before 9.0.6 and 8.x before 8.11.6 allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service 21Monitor
- CVE-2005-0036The DNS implementation in DeleGate 8.10.2 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a compressed DNS packet with 21Monitor
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
Proof of concept available
A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.
Evidence
- Exploit-DB entry ×1
Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.
| Source | Kind | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Exploit-DB entry | local | 2015-12-30 |
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.
- First PoC-1477 d
- Published
- TodaySep 30, 2026+2450 d
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
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Someone with local access to the system can trigger it.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Local
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-269 · Improper Privilege ManagementCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-primary
Root cause
To simplify setup, a service account is granted broad, cluster-wide permissions. The principle of least privilege is skipped during installation.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-269 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
kind: ClusterRolerules: - apiGroups: ["*"] resources: ["*"] verbs: ["*"]Fixed
kind: Rolemetadata: namespace: lodos-systemrules: - apiGroups: ["apps"] resources: ["deployments"] verbs: ["get", "list", "update"]Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Noroxi analysis
No Noroxi analysis for this record yet
We don't hand-write analysis for all 385,000+ vulnerabilities; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.
We use this product, ask for helpChange log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.