Ironport Encryption ApplianceHardware / appliance · Cisco
CVE-2009-0055
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 request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the administration interface in Cisco IronPort Encryption Appliance 6.2.4 before 6.2.4.1.1, 6.2.5, 6.2.6, 6.2.7 before 6.2.7.7, 6.3 before 6.3.0.4, and 6.5 before 6.5.0.2; and Cisco IronPort PostX 6.2.1 before 6.2.1.1 and 6.2.2 before 6.2.2.3; allows remote attackers to modify appliance preferences as arbitrary users via unspecified vectors.
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 confidenceCSRF vulnerability in Cisco IronPort Encryption Appliance and PostX administration interfaces allows remote attackers to modify appliance preferences as arbitrary users by tricking authenticated administrators into visiting malicious pages.
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
Ironport Encryption ApplianceHardware / appliance
= 6.2.4= 6.2.4.1= 6.2.5= 6.2.6= 6.2.7= 6.2.7.1= 6.2.7.2= 6.2.7.3= 6.2.7.4= 6.2.7.5= 6.2.7.6= 6.3
Ironport PostxHardware / appliance
= 6.2.1= 6.2.2= 6.2.2.1= 6.2.2.2CVSS 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 IronPort productLog into the appliance or check your asset inventory to determine if you have Cisco IronPort Encryption Appliance or Cisco IronPort PostX installedAffected if The product is either IronPort Encryption Appliance or IronPort PostX
-
Check the installed versionAccess the appliance administration interface and navigate to the About or System Health page to view the firmware/software version, or use the appliance's CLI command to retrieve the version (consult product documentation for the exact command)Affected if The version matches one of the affected versions: 6.2.4, 6.2.4.1, 6.2.5, 6.2.6, 6.2.7, 6.2.7.1, 6.2.7.2, 6.2.7.3, 6.2.7.4, 6.2.7.5, 6.2.7.6, or 6.3 for Encryption Appliance; or 6.2.1, 6.2.2, 6.2.2.1, or 6.2.2.2 for PostX
-
Verify admin interface accessibilityConfirm whether the web-based administration interface is accessible from network segments where users could be lured to malicious sites (typically HTTPS on port 443 or similar)Affected if The administration interface is exposed to network segments where administrators could be tricked into visiting untrusted web pages while authenticated
You are affected if you run Cisco IronPort Encryption Appliance or PostX with a version matching one of the listed affected versions and the admin interface is accessible to administrators who could be socially engineered.
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 dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens on all administrative actions and verify Origin/Referer headers to prevent cross-site request forgery attacks.
Fix this in Ironport Encryption Appliance
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 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 $4,480.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-0055 — 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-2009-0055 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