Servicedesk PlusApplication · Manageengine

CVE-2011-2755

MEDIUM · 5.0 CVSS v2.0 Published 2011-07-17
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
59/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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
Directory traversal vulnerability in FileDownload.jsp in ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus 8.0 before Build 8012 allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files 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 confidence

Directory traversal vulnerability in FileDownload.jsp in ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus 8.0 allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files on the server by manipulating file path parameters in the JSP component.

MitigationUpgrade to ServiceDesk Plus Build 8012 or later, or implement strict input validation/sanitization on file path parameters in FileDownload.jsp to prevent path traversal sequences.

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
Servicedesk PlusApplication
Affected:= 8.0

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
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 checks

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

  1. Identify ServiceDesk Plus installation
    Locate the ServiceDesk Plus installation directory and look for version information in about.jsp, version.txt, or the admin console. Common paths include C:\ManageEngine\ServiceDesk or /opt/ManageEngine/ServiceDesk.
    Affected if ServiceDesk Plus is installed and the version cannot be determined or is not 8.0
  2. Verify exact version 8.0
    Check the specific build/version number. In ServiceDesk Plus, go to Admin > About or check the build.info file in the installation directory. Look for version string '8.0' with build number prior to 8012.
    Affected if The installed version is exactly 8.0 (any build before 8012)
  3. Confirm FileDownload.jsp exists
    Check if FileDownload.jsp exists in the web application's JSP directory. This is typically in <installation_dir>/webapps/servicedesk/ or <installation_dir>/webapps/ROOT/. The file should be present in the deployed web application.
    Affected if FileDownload.jsp exists in the deployed web application on version 8.0
  4. Check web application accessibility
    Verify the ServiceDesk Plus web interface is accessible externally or internally. The vulnerability is remotely exploitable via HTTP requests to FileDownload.jsp.
    Affected if The ServiceDesk Plus web interface is accessible (the attack vector is via HTTP)
  5. Inspect application logs for path traversal attempts
    Review web server or ServiceDesk Plus logs for suspicious requests containing ../ patterns to FileDownload.jsp with manipulated file path parameters.
    Affected if Logs show traversal attempts to FileDownload.jsp with ../ sequences (indicates active targeting)

A user is affected if ServiceDesk Plus version 8.0 (build before 8012) is installed and the FileDownload.jsp component is accessible via the web interface.

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

Upgrade to ServiceDesk Plus Build 8012 or later, or implement strict input validation/sanitization on file path parameters in FileDownload.jsp to prevent path traversal sequences.

Fix this in Servicedesk Plus Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
16.0 hours of engineering $2,760
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,416.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-2755 — 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-2011-2755 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