Mobility Services EngineHardware / appliance · Cisco
CVE-2013-3469
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 · uneditedCisco Mobility Services Engine does not properly set up the Oracle SSL service, which allows remote attackers to obtain an unauthenticated session to the database-replication port, and consequently obtain sensitive information, via an SSL connection, aka Bug ID CSCue50794.
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 · moderate confidenceThe Cisco Mobility Services Engine has a misconfiguration in its Oracle SSL service setup that fails to properly enforce SSL authentication on the database-replication port. This allows remote attackers to establish unauthenticated SSL connections and potentially intercept sensitive data in transit between database replication endpoints.
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
Mobility Services EngineHardware / appliance
all versionsCVSS 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.
-
Confirm Cisco Mobility Services Engine is deployedIdentify whether the Cisco Mobility Services Engine software is installed in your environmentAffected if The product is present and running
-
Locate Oracle SSL configuration for database replicationInspect Oracle SSL service configuration files and settings associated with the database replication functionalityAffected if Oracle SSL is configured for database replication without requiring mutual authentication
-
Verify SSL mutual authentication enforcementExamine the SSL configuration on the database replication port to determine if both client and server certificate validation is requiredAffected if Mutual authentication (client and server certificate validation) is not enforced on the replication port
-
Test for unauthenticated SSL connection acceptanceAttempt to initiate an SSL connection to the database replication port without presenting a valid client certificateAffected if The SSL connection is accepted without client certificate authentication
If Cisco Mobility Services Engine is running with Oracle SSL database replication where mutual authentication is not required, the environment is vulnerable to unauthenticated SSL connections.
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 dataApply the Cisco patch for Bug ID CSCue50794 and ensure Oracle SSL is configured to require mutual authentication (client and server certificate validation) for the database replication service.
Fix this in Mobility Services Engine
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-3469 — 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-2013-3469 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