CVE-2003-0201

HIGHCVSS v2 · 10.010.0
EchelonGraph scoreLOW confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS v2 base score.

This CVE was only ever scored under CVSS v2.0. NVD CVSS v2.0 base 10.0 — NVD rates that HIGH (NVD's v2 bands: LOW 0.0–3.9 / MEDIUM 4.0–6.9 / HIGH 7.0–10.0; no CRITICAL band). Vector AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C. CVSS v2 is an older, coarser metric than v3.1/v4.0 (no Scope, no User Interaction, no Attack Requirements), so it is not directly comparable to a v3 or v4 score. NVD has never re-scored this record under v3. EPSS predicts 85% exploitation probability in the next 30 days; it does not lift the v2 base. EPSS sets EG Risk's exploitation input. Confidence: LOW.

Triggered by: NVD CVSS v2.0 (legacy fallback)
Sources: NVD CVSS v2.0
Trending — 5 sources updated this weekWeaponized

Also known asEUVD-2003-0196 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

10.0EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High exploitation likelihood — EPSS 85%
  • Public exploit code is available (Metasploit, Exploit-DB, marked verified by Exploit-DB, other public proof-of-concept code)
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 85%CVSS v2: 10.0Exploit: Metasploit · Exploit-DB (verified) · other public PoCExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

Buffer overflow in the call_trans2open function in trans2.c for Samba 2.2.x before 2.2.8a, 2.0.10 and earlier 2.0.x versions, and Samba-TNG before 0.3.2, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code.

CVSS v2.0 (legacy)
10.0HIGHNVD never assigned a CVSS v3 rating to this CVE
EG Score
10.0HIGHlow confidence
EG Risk
79
EG Risk 79/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity100% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 10.0 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation85% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.
Exploitation public PoC (exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
85%
EPSS %ILE
99th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (10.0): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 10.0 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
10.0 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.NVD CVSS v2.0 · CVSS v2.0AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
EG Likelihood
85% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-01). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track* at medium mission impactTrack at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation public PoC (exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

May 5, 2003

Last Modified

June 16, 2026

Patch Availability(3)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
redhatpatch2003-07-15redhat
redhatpatch2003-04-08redhat
redhatpatch2003-04-07redhat

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(5 across 5 ecosystems)
Debian:11(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
samba—
  • every version up to 3.0: fixed in 3.0
—
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
samba—
  • every version up to 3.0: fixed in 3.0
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
samba—
  • every version up to 3.0: fixed in 3.0
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
samba—
  • every version up to 3.0: fixed in 3.0
—
Debian:3.0(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
samba—
  • every version up to 2.2.3a-12.3: fixed in 2.2.3a-12.3
—

All Vendor Advisories

(3)

Every vendor that published an advisory referencing this CVE — pulled from our cve_vendor_advisories aggregation. Click any row for the vendor's original advisory page.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 26× in last 7d / 76× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 99 of 125 refreshes on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 1 repeat row among the latest 100 is merged into the row it repeats. The 26 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-02 12:59 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-11-02 12:59 UTCVendor advisory
  3. 2026-11-02 12:59 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  4. 2026-11-01 14:13 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-11-01 14:13 UTCVendor advisory
  6. 2026-11-01 14:13 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  7. 2026-11-01 04:55 UTCOSV refresh
  8. 2026-10-31 15:29 UTCVendor advisory
  9. 2026-10-31 15:28 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  10. 2026-10-30 16:44 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-10-30 16:44 UTCVendor advisory
  12. 2026-10-30 16:44 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  13. 2026-10-30 16:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  14. 2026-10-29 17:59 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-29 17:59 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-10-29 17:59 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  17. 2026-10-28 19:11 UTCEG score recompute
  18. 2026-10-28 19:11 UTCVendor advisory
  19. 2026-10-28 19:11 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  20. 2026-10-28 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  21. 2026-10-27 20:08 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-10-27 20:08 UTCVendor advisory
  23. 2026-10-27 20:08 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  24. 2026-10-26 21:23 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-10-26 21:23 UTCVendor advisory
Show 74 more
  1. 2026-10-26 21:23 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  2. 2026-10-25 20:34 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-25 20:34 UTCVendor advisory
  4. 2026-10-25 20:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  5. 2026-10-25 16:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  6. 2026-10-24 21:49 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-24 21:49 UTCVendor advisory
  8. 2026-10-24 21:49 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  9. 2026-10-23 23:04 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-23 23:04 UTCVendor advisory
  11. 2026-10-23 23:04 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  12. 2026-10-23 00:02 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-10-23 00:02 UTCVendor advisory
  14. 2026-10-23 00:02 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  15. 2026-10-22 16:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  16. 2026-10-22 01:14 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-22 01:14 UTCVendor advisory
  18. 2026-10-22 01:14 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  19. 2026-10-21 16:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  20. 2026-10-21 02:27 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-10-21 02:27 UTCVendor advisory
  22. 2026-10-21 02:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  23. 2026-10-20 16:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  24. 2026-10-20 03:24 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-10-20 03:24 UTCVendor advisory
  26. 2026-10-20 03:24 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  27. 2026-10-19 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  28. 2026-10-19 03:51 UTCEG score recompute
  29. 2026-10-19 03:51 UTCVendor advisory
  30. 2026-10-19 03:50 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  31. 2026-10-18 05:03 UTCEG score recompute
  32. 2026-10-18 05:03 UTCVendor advisory
  33. 2026-10-18 05:02 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  34. 2026-10-17 05:51 UTCVendor advisory
  35. 2026-10-17 05:51 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  36. 2026-10-16 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  37. 2026-10-16 06:54 UTCVendor advisory
  38. 2026-10-16 06:53 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  39. 2026-10-15 05:35 UTCVendor advisory
  40. 2026-10-15 05:35 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  41. 2026-10-14 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  42. 2026-10-14 01:15 UTCVendor advisory
  43. 2026-10-14 01:15 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  44. 2026-10-13 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  45. 2026-10-12 21:24 UTCEG score recompute
  46. 2026-10-12 21:24 UTCVendor advisory
  47. 2026-10-12 21:24 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6mm7-g5cc-wpx6 · GitHub severity HIGH
  48. 2026-10-12 02:25 UTCEG score recompute
  49. 2026-10-07 23:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  50. 2026-10-06 15:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  51. 2026-10-05 21:56 UTCOSV refresh
  52. 2026-09-29 02:38 UTCEG score recompute
  53. 2026-09-16 05:27 UTCOSV refresh
  54. 2026-09-12 14:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  55. 2026-09-10 09:23 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  56. 2026-08-28 03:40 UTCOSV refresh
  57. 2026-08-11 17:02 UTCOSV refresh
  58. 2026-07-26 17:17 UTCOSV refresh
  59. 2026-07-26 13:23 UTCEG score recomputeAssessed again: 10.0 HIGH
  60. 2026-07-24 14:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  61. 2026-07-23 00:45 UTCEG score recompute
  62. 2026-07-23 00:26 UTCEG score recompute▼ 8.90
  63. 2026-07-22 23:49 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 8.9 HIGH
  64. 2026-07-22 21:29 UTCEG score recompute▼ 9.00
  65. 2026-07-16 16:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  66. 2026-07-09 11:16 UTCOSV refresh
  67. 2026-07-04 06:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  68. 2026-06-28 04:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  69. 2026-06-23 21:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  70. 2026-06-21 01:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  71. 2026-06-21 00:12 UTCOSV refresh
  72. 2026-06-17 17:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  73. 2026-06-15 17:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 85% · 99th percentile
  74. 2026-06-12 23:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 88% · 99th percentile

Publicly available exploits

(18 references, 10 shown)

Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (4 Metasploit modules, 12 Exploit-DB entries, 2 GitHub PoCs). Defenders should treat patch urgency accordingly.

  • Exploit-DBEDB-16861✓ verified
    Published Jul 14, 2010

    Samba 2.2.8 (Linux x86) - 'trans2open' Remote Overflow (Metasploit)

    Open source ↗
  • Exploit-DBEDB-16330✓ verified
    Published Jun 21, 2010

    Samba 2.2.8 (Solaris SPARC) - 'trans2open' Remote Overflow (Metasploit)

    Open source ↗
  • Exploit-DBEDB-16876✓ verified
    Published Jun 21, 2010

    Samba 2.2.8 (OSX/PPC) - 'trans2open' Remote Overflow (Metasploit)

    Open source ↗
  • Exploit-DBEDB-16880✓ verified
    Published Jun 17, 2010

    Samba 2.2.8 (BSD x86) - 'trans2open' Remote Overflow (Metasploit)

    Open source ↗
  • Metasploitexploit/freebsd/samba/trans2open✓ verified
    Published Jun 15, 2010

    Samba trans2open Overflow (*BSD x86)

    Open source ↗
  • Metasploitexploit/linux/samba/trans2open✓ verified
    Published Jun 12, 2010

    Samba trans2open Overflow (Linux x86)

    Open source ↗
  • Metasploitexploit/osx/samba/trans2open✓ verified
    Published Jun 16, 2006

    Samba trans2open Overflow (Mac OS X PPC)

    Open source ↗
  • Metasploitexploit/solaris/samba/trans2open✓ verified
    Published Jun 16, 2006

    Samba trans2open Overflow (Solaris SPARC)

    Open source ↗
  • Exploit-DBEDB-55✓ verified
    Published Jul 13, 2003

    Samba 2.2.8 - Brute Force Method Remote Command Execution

    Open source ↗
  • Exploit-DBEDB-22470✓ verified
    Published May 12, 2003

    Samba 2.2.x - 'call_trans2open' Remote Buffer Overflow (3)

    Open source ↗

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2003-0201?
CVE-2003-0201 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on May 5, 2003. Buffer overflow in the call_trans2open function in trans2.c for Samba 2.2.x before 2.2.8a, 2.0.10 and earlier 2.0.x versions, and Samba-TNG before 0.3.2, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code.
When was CVE-2003-0201 made public?
CVE-2003-0201 was made public on April 7, 2003: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, MITRE Corporation, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on May 5, 2003. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of June 16, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2003-0201 actively exploited?
CVE-2003-0201 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. EchelonGraph's EG-KEV model places it in Tier 2 (Weaponized), which is not evidence of exploitation: a Metasploit module exists for it, and Exploit-DB marks a public exploit for it as verified. EchelonGraph does not test whether exploit code works. FIRST EPSS estimates a 85% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (99th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
How do I remediate CVE-2003-0201?
A fix for CVE-2003-0201 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2003-0201

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2003-0201?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.