CVE-2014-0104
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 · uneditedIn fence-agents before 4.0.17 does not verify remote SSL certificates in the fence_cisco_ucs.py script which can potentially allow for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers via arbitrary SSL certificates.
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 confidenceThe fence_cisco_ucs.py script in fence-agents versions before 4.0.17 fails to verify remote SSL certificates when establishing connections to Cisco UCS managers. This allows an attacker positioned between the fencing agent and the UCS manager to intercept and impersonate the SSL server using a fraudulent certificate, enabling man-in-the-middle attacks.
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< 4.0.17CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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 fence-agents is installedCheck if the fence-agents package or fence_cisco_ucs.py script exists in your environment using your system's package manager or by locating the script file.Affected if fence-agents or fence_cisco_ucs.py is present on the system
-
Identify the installed fence-agents versionRetrieve the version of the installed fence-agents package using your system's package management tooling, or run fence_cisco_ucs.py with a version flag if available.Affected if the installed version is lower than 4.0.17
-
Verify the script is configured for Cisco UCS fencingReview your fencing configuration files to determine if fence_cisco_ucs.py is configured as a fencing agent for Cisco UCS managers.Affected if fence_cisco_ucs.py is configured and in use for Cisco UCS
-
Confirm SSL certificate verification statusInspect the fence_cisco_ucs.py script or its configuration for SSL certificate verification behavior; in affected versions prior to 4.0.17, the script does not verify remote SSL certificates.Affected if the script lacks SSL certificate verification and connects to a Cisco UCS manager
You are affected if fence-agents version is below 4.0.17 and fence_cisco_ucs.py is configured to connect to Cisco UCS managers without SSL certificate verification.
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 data4.0.17
Upgrade fence-agents to version 4.0.17 or later which includes SSL certificate verification. If upgrading is not immediately possible, ensure network segmentation to prevent MITM positioning between fencing agents and managed devices.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-0104 — 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-2014-0104 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