Prime Central For Hosted Collaboration Solution AssuranceApplication · Cisco
CVE-2013-3390
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 · uneditedMemory leak in Cisco Prime Central for Hosted Collaboration Solution (HCS) Assurance 8.6 and 9.x before 9.2(1) allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via a flood of TCP packets, aka Bug ID CSCub59158.
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 confidenceA memory leak vulnerability in Cisco Prime Central for Hosted Collaboration Solution (HCS) Assurance versions 8.6 and 9.x before 9.2(1) allows remote attackers to cause denial of service by sending a flood of TCP packets, leading to excessive memory consumption.
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
Prime Central For Hosted Collaboration Solution AssuranceApplication
= 8.6= 9.0= 9.1= 9.1.1= 9.2CVSS 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
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C
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 productLocate the Cisco Prime Central for HCS Assurance installation and confirm the product name matches exactlyAffected if The product is not Cisco Prime Central for HCS Assurance
-
Determine the installed versionUse the product's web interface, CLI, or system information to retrieve the exact version number of the Cisco Prime Central for HCS Assurance installationAffected if The version is 8.6, 9.0, 9.1, 9.1.1, or any version 9.2 prior to 9.2(1)
-
Verify network exposureConfirm that the Cisco Prime Central for HCS Assurance management interface is network accessible (typically via HTTP/HTTPS on ports 8080, 8443, or similar)Affected if The management interface is exposed to network access without proper filtering
A user is affected if they have Cisco Prime Central for HCS Assurance versions 8.6, 9.0, 9.1, 9.1.1, or any 9.2 version before 9.2(1) installed and the management interface is network accessible.
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 Cisco Prime Central for HCS Assurance version 9.2(1) or later to patch the memory leak vulnerability.
Fix this in Prime Central For Hosted Collaboration Solution Assurance
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-3390 — 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-2013-3390 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