CVE-2014-0363
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 ServerTrustManager component in the Ignite Realtime Smack XMPP API before 4.0.0-rc1 does not verify basicConstraints and nameConstraints in X.509 certificate chains from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate chain.
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 ServerTrustManager component in the Ignite Realtime Smack XMPP API before version 4.0.0-rc1 fails to verify basicConstraints and nameConstraints in X.509 certificate chains from SSL servers. This certificate validation weakness allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers using crafted certificate chains and intercept sensitive information.
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< 4.0.0CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:M/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 Smack library versionLocate the smack library in your project dependencies (check pom.xml, build.gradle, MANIFEST.MF in the jar file, or the actual jar filename) and note its version number.Affected if The version is lower than 4.0.0 (for example 3.x.x or any 4.0.0-beta version)
-
Confirm SSL/TLS is in useSearch your codebase for SSLContext, TrustManager, or XMPPConnection configurations that enable TLS/SSL for XMPP connections.Affected if Your application connects to XMPP servers over SSL or TLS (port 5223 or 5222 with encryption)
-
Check for custom ServerTrustManagerSearch for any custom ServerTrustManager implementation or custom TrustManager that handles X.509 certificate validation for XMPP connections.Affected if You are using the default Smack TrustManager without custom constraints checking, or your custom implementation does not verify basicConstraints and nameConstraints fields in the certificate chain
You are affected if your deployed Smack library version is below 4.0.0 AND your application uses SSL/TLS connections to XMPP servers with the default or incomplete certificate chain validation.
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 data4.0.0
Upgrade to Smack XMPP API version 4.0.0-rc1 or later which implements proper X.509 certificate chain validation including basicConstraints and nameConstraints verification.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-0363 — 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-2014-0363 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