CVE-2002-1168
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 request that contains an Location: header with a "%0a%0d" (CRLF) sequence, which echoes the Location as an HTTP header in the server response.
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 · moderate confidenceIBM Web Traffic Express Caching Proxy Server 3.6 and 4.x before 4.0.1.26 is vulnerable to CRLF injection via the Location header. Attackers can inject '%0a%0d' (CRLF) sequences to split HTTP responses and potentially inject malicious script content into headers that get reflected back to users, enabling XSS attacks against other users of the proxy.
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 the installed IBM WebSphere Caching Proxy Server versionLocate the proxy server installation directory and check version files or run the server version command. Common locations include /opt/ibm/wte or the product-specific installation path. Look for a version file or use the server's admin interface to retrieve version information.Affected if The installed version is 3.6 or any 4.x version prior to 4.0.1.26
-
Verify the proxy service is running and accessibleConfirm the proxy server process is active and listening on its configured ports (typically 8080 for HTTP or 80 for web traffic). Use netstat or ss to list listening services, or check the server's admin status page if available.Affected if The proxy is running and accessible to network users, which allows remote attackers to send malicious requests
-
Check if the proxy accepts external HTTP requestsReview the proxy configuration files (often named proxy.conf, httpd.conf, or similar in the installation directory) to determine if the proxy allows requests from untrusted or external networks rather than only localhost.Affected if The proxy is configured to accept connections from untrusted networks or the internet, enabling external attackers to exploit the CRLF injection flaw
A user is affected if they are running IBM WebSphere Caching Proxy Server version 3.6 or any 4.x version prior to 4.0.1.26, and the proxy service is accessible to untrusted network sources.
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 4.0.1.26 or later. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, implement input validation to reject Location headers containing CRLF sequences at the proxy boundary.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-1168 — 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-2002-1168 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