CVE-2010-5340
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 · uneditedIceWarp Webclient before 10.2.1 has XSS via an HTTP POST request: webmail/ with the parameter password is non-persistent in 10.2.0.
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 (non-persistent) cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in IceWarp Webclient versions prior to 10.2.1. The password parameter in the webmail/ endpoint does not properly sanitize user input, allowing injection of malicious JavaScript through HTTP POST requests.
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>= 10.0, < 10.2.1CVSS 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:3.1/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.
-
Identify IceWarp Webclient installationLocate IceWarp Webclient by checking for the webmail interface. Common paths include /webmail/ or /icewarp/ on your web server. Check your web server configuration for Alias or Redirect directives pointing to IceWarp.Affected if IceWarp Webclient is installed and accessible via web browser
-
Determine installed versionAccess the webmail login page and check for version information in the page source, footer, or by viewing the HTTP headers. Alternatively, check the IceWarp installation directory for a version file or check the admin interface.Affected if Version cannot be determined or is confirmed to be < 10.2.1
-
Compare version against affected rangeIf a version number is found, verify whether it falls within the affected range: 10.0.0 through 10.2.0.x (any version >= 10.0.0 but < 10.2.1)Affected if Installed version is 10.0.x, 10.1.x, or 10.2.0.x (any version from 10.0 up to but not including 10.2.1)
-
Verify webmail endpoint is accessibleConfirm the webmail/ endpoint is reachable by attempting to access it via HTTP/HTTPS. The vulnerability exists in the password parameter handling within this endpoint.Affected if The webmail/ endpoint responds and accepts POST requests containing a password parameter
A system is affected if IceWarp Webclient version 10.0 through 10.2.0 is installed and the webmail/ endpoint is accessible, as the XSS flaw exists in the password parameter handling of login submissions.
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 data10.2.1
Upgrade IceWarp Webclient to version 10.2.1 or later. Alternatively, implement input validation and output encoding on the password parameter at the application layer or WAF to block XSS payloads.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-5340 — 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-2010-5340 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