CVE-2014-0350
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 · uneditedThe Poco::Net::X509Certificate::verify method in the NetSSL library in POCO C++ Libraries before 1.4.6p4 allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers via crafted DNS PTR records that are requested during comparison of a server name to a wildcard domain name in an X.509 certificate.
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 Poco::Net::X509Certificate::verify method in NetSSL performs hostname verification by comparing server names to wildcard domain names in X.509 certificates. During this process, the method requests DNS PTR records, which an attacker can manipulate to bypass verification and spoof SSL servers, 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<= 1.4.6= 1.4.5= 1.4.6CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/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 POCO C++ Libraries installationSearch for POCO library files or headers on the system. Check for files named libPoco* or include directories containing 'poco' or 'NetSSL'. On Linux: find /usr -name '*Poco*' 2>/dev/null or dpkg -l | grep poco. On Windows: search Program Files for POCO folders.Affected if POCO libraries are not found or version cannot be determined (unclear if affected)
-
Determine POCO NetSSL versionIf library files are found, check the version. For installed packages: poco-devel or libpoco-dev package version. For source builds: check the VERSION file or CHANGELOG in the POCO source directory. Compare the found version against the affected range: 1.4.5, 1.4.6, or any version <= 1.4.6.Affected if Version is 1.4.5, 1.4.6, or any version lower than or equal to 1.4.6
-
Identify use of X509Certificate::verify for hostname verificationSearch application source code for calls to Poco::Net::X509Certificate::verify method. Also check for usage of HTTPS or SSL client classes (e.g., HTTPSClientSession, HTTPSClientSession) that perform automatic hostname verification. Grep for 'verify' and 'X509Certificate' in source files.Affected if Code uses X509Certificate::verify method or any SSL/TLS client with hostname verification enabled
-
Confirm DNS PTR resolution is triggered during verificationReview the vulnerable code path: when verify() is called with a hostname argument for wildcard certificate matching, the method performs DNS PTR record lookups. This is triggered when server name does not exactly match the certificate CN/Subject Alternative Names and wildcard matching is attempted.Affected if Hostname verification is performed against certificates containing wildcard domains (e.g., *.example.com)
User is affected if POCO NetSSL version is 1.4.5, 1.4.6, or <=1.4.6 AND the application uses X509Certificate::verify for hostname verification against wildcard SSL certificates.
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 POCO C++ Libraries 1.4.6p4 or later, which addresses the improper DNS PTR record handling during certificate hostname verification.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-0350 — 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-2014-0350 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