320 Sip PhoneHardware / appliance · Snom

CVE-2008-1250

HIGH · 9.3 CVSS v2.0 Published 2008-03-10
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in the web interface on the central phone server for the Snom 320 SIP Phone allow remote attackers to perform actions as the phone user, as demonstrated by inserting an address-book entry containing an XSS sequence.

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 confidence

Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in the web interface of the Snom 320 SIP Phone allow remote attackers to trick authenticated users into performing unintended actions, such as injecting XSS payloads through address-book entries.

MitigationApply vendor firmware updates if available; otherwise implement compensating controls such as network segmentation to limit exposure of the phone's web interface to untrusted networks.

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
320 Sip PhoneHardware / appliance
Affected:all versions

CVSS 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
Complete
Integrity
Complete
Availability
Complete

AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify Snom 320 devices on your network
    Scan your network for devices with the Snom 320 SIP Phone web interface. Access the device admin page by entering the phone's IP address in a browser. Look for the Snom 320 login page or check the device firmware version page for confirmation.
    Affected if The device is a Snom 320 SIP Phone and the web interface is accessible on the network.
  2. Verify the web interface is enabled and accessible
    Confirm the web interface responds by accessing http://[device-ip] or https://[device-ip]. The Snom 320 web interface should present a login page or admin panel.
    Affected if The web interface is accessible without additional network restrictions.
  3. Check for CSRF protection in web forms
    Log into the web interface and navigate to forms that modify device settings (such as the address-book or settings pages). View the page source or intercept requests to examine if anti-CSRF tokens or unique request identifiers are included in forms.
    Affected if Forms lack anti-CSRF tokens or unique request validation, allowing attackers to forge requests on behalf of authenticated users.
  4. Verify address-book input is not protected against XSS injection
    While authenticated, access the address-book functionality and attempt to inject HTML or script tags into contact fields (such as name or phone number fields). Submit the form and check if the input is reflected back without sanitization.
    Affected if Address-book entries accept and reflect unsanitized input, indicating the XSS injection vector described in the CVE is present.

If you have accessible Snom 320 SIP Phones with an unprotected web interface lacking CSRF tokens, and the address-book feature accepts unsanitized input, your environment is affected by this CVE.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply vendor firmware updates if available; otherwise implement compensating controls such as network segmentation to limit exposure of the phone's web interface to untrusted networks.

Fix this in 320 Sip Phone Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation6.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
28.0 hours of engineering $4,980
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,968.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-1250 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2008-1250 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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