CVE-2010-3902
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 · uneditedOpenConnect before 2.26 places the webvpn cookie value in the debugging output, which might allow remote attackers to obtain sensitive information by reading this output, as demonstrated by output posted to the public openconnect-devel mailing list.
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 confidenceOpenConnect before version 2.26 includes the webvpn authentication cookie value in debugging output. This creates an information disclosure vulnerability where the sensitive session cookie could be exposed through log files or debugging streams, potentially allowing attackers to hijack VPN sessions if they gain access to the debug output.
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<= 2.25= 1.00= 1.10= 1.20= 1.30= 2.22CVSS 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
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/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.
-
Check OpenConnect versionRun 'openconnect --version' or check the package manager (dpkg -l openconnect, rpm -qi openconnect)Affected if Version is 2.25 or lower, or exactly equals 1.00, 1.10, 1.20, 1.30, or 2.22
-
Check if debug logging is enabledLook for command-line flags like -v, --debug, or environment variables such as OPENCONNECT_DEBUG. Also check for any configuration files that enable verbose loggingAffected if Debug logging or verbose output is enabled
-
Examine log files for cookie exposureSearch log files (typically in /var/log/, or application-specific log directories) for strings containing 'webvpn' or authentication cookie values. Use: grep -r 'webvpn' /var/log/ or review any openconnect*.log filesAffected if Log files contain webvpn authentication cookie values or session tokens in debugging output
You are affected if OpenConnect version is 2.25 or earlier (or matches 1.00/1.10/1.20/1.30/2.22) AND debugging output is enabled or accessible log files exist that may contain the exposed cookie.
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 OpenConnect version 2.26 or later. Ensure debugging output is not exposed to unauthorized parties or publicly accessible.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-3902 — 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-2010-3902 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