CVE-2002-1167
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in IBM Web Traffic Express Caching Proxy Server 3.6 and 4.x before 4.0.1.26 allows remote attackers to execute script as other users via an HTTP GET request.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceCross-site scripting vulnerability in IBM Web Traffic Express Caching Proxy Server versions 3.6 and 4.x prior to 4.0.1.26 allows remote attackers to inject malicious script through HTTP GET requests. The vulnerability stems from insufficient input validation of user-supplied data in HTTP requests, enabling script execution in the context of other users' sessions.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 3.6= 4.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if IBM Web Traffic Express Caching Proxy Server is installedCheck for the presence of IBM Web Traffic Express or WebSphere Caching Proxy Server on the system. Look for installation directories, running processes named 'httpd' or 'proxy', or check installed software lists.Affected if The product is found on the system
-
Determine the installed versionLocate version information in the proxy server's configuration files, startup scripts, or run a version query command if available (common locations: /opt/ibm/httpd/, /opt/ibm/wte/, or check registry on Windows). Compare the version number to the affected ranges.Affected if The installed version is 3.6 or 4.x prior to 4.0.1.26
-
Verify the HTTP proxy service is accessibleCheck if the proxy service is running and listening on configured ports (typically 8080, 80, or 443). Attempt to access the proxy administration interface or send a test HTTP GET request to the proxy.Affected if The proxy service is active and reachable over the network
-
Confirm the vulnerability is exposedSend a test HTTP GET request containing a simple script tag (for example, <script>alert('test')</script>) as part of the request URL or parameters through the proxy. Observe if the script is reflected back in the response without proper encoding.Affected if User-supplied input in GET requests is reflected unescaped in responses
The environment is affected if IBM Web Traffic Express Caching Proxy Server version 3.6 or 4.x prior to 4.0.1.26 is installed and the HTTP proxy service is accessible to remote users.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade to IBM Web Traffic Express Caching Proxy Server version 4.0.1.26 or later, which contains the patch for this XSS vulnerability. If immediate upgrade is not feasible, implement input validation and output encoding on the proxy server or deploy a WAF rule to filter malicious script payloads in HTTP requests.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-1167 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2002-1167 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data