JuddiApplication · Apache
CVE-2009-1198
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 Apache jUDDI before 2.0 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the dsname parameter to happyjuddi.jsp.
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 confidenceReflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Apache jUDDI versions before 2.0. The dsname parameter in happyjuddi.jsp is vulnerable to XSS, allowing remote attackers to inject arbitrary JavaScript or HTML into the page via unsanitized user input.
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
JuddiApplication
< 2.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
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.
-
Locate jUDDI installationSearch for jUDDI WAR or exploded directory in your application server (commonly Tomcat, JBoss, or similar). Typical paths include /webapps/juddi, /webapps/juddiv3, or custom deployments under webapps. Check for files named juddi*.war or directories containing 'juddi' in the deployment folder.Affected if jUDDI is found in the environment
-
Identify jUDDI versionCheck the version of the installed jUDDI. Look in: the WAR filename (e.g., juddi-1.x.war), a version.properties file within the deployment, the pom.xml if source is present, or a MANIFEST.MF file in the WAR. Compare the version number to the affected range.Affected if Version is before 2.0 (e.g., 1.x, 1.0, 1.0.1, etc.)
-
Verify happyjuddi.jsp existsLocate happyjuddi.jsp file within the jUDDI deployment. Search in the web root or /jsps/ directory of the jUDDI web application. Confirm the file is present in the deployment.Affected if happyjuddi.jsp file exists in the jUDDI deployment
-
Confirm happyjuddi.jsp is accessibleCheck if the application server is running and happyjuddi.jsp is accessible via HTTP. Try accessing the URL pattern: http://<host>:<port>/<context-path>/happyjuddi.jsp. The vulnerability is only exploitable if the JSP is accessible over the network.Affected if The jUDDI web application is deployed and accessible via HTTP
You are affected if jUDDI version is below 2.0, happyjuddi.jsp exists in the deployment, and the application is accessible over the network, as the dsname parameter in happyjuddi.jsp will accept unsanitized input leading to XSS.
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 data2.0
Update Apache jUDDI to version 2.0 or later, or implement proper input validation and output encoding for the dsname parameter in happyjuddi.jsp.
Fix this in Juddi
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-1198 — 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-2009-1198 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