CVE-2014-0633
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 GUI in EMC VPLEX GeoSynchrony 4.x and 5.x before 5.3 does not properly validate session-timeout values, which might make it easier for remote attackers to execute arbitrary code by leveraging an unattended workstation.
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 EMC VPLEX GeoSynchrony GUI versions 4.x and 5.x before 5.3 fails to properly validate session-timeout values. This session management weakness in the web interface could allow a remote attacker who gains access to an unattended authenticated session to execute arbitrary code, likely through manipulation of session timeout parameters that are not adequately sanitized before being processed.
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= 5.0= 5.1= 5.2= 5.2.1CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:A/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/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 if EMC VPLEX GeoSynchrony is installedLocate VPLEX installation directories or check for VPLEX processes and services running on the system. Common paths may include /opt/emc/vplex or similar vendor directories.Affected if EMC VPLEX GeoSynchrony software is present on the system
-
Determine the installed GeoSynchrony versionUse system commands to query the installed version, such as checking product version files, running version display commands, or reviewing installation metadata. Compare the version number against the affected ranges: 4.0, 5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 5.2.1, or any 4.x or 5.x version before 5.3.Affected if The installed version is 4.0, 5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 5.2.1, or any 5.x version prior to 5.3
-
Verify the web GUI interface is accessibleConfirm the VPLEX GUI web service is running and accessible. This may involve checking if the web server process is active and if network listeners for the GUI port are responding.Affected if The VPLEX web GUI interface is enabled and accessible on the network
-
Inspect session timeout configuration settingsAccess the session management or security configuration panel within the VPLEX GUI, or examine configuration files that control session timeout parameters. Look for settings related to session expiration and timeout values.Affected if Session timeout parameters can be modified through the web interface without proper validation
The environment is affected if EMC VPLEX GeoSynchrony versions 4.0, 5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 5.2.1, or any 5.x version before 5.3 is installed with the web GUI interface enabled and 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 dataApply the vendor patch (VPLEX GeoSynchrony 5.3 or later) and review session management configurations. Consider implementing stricter session policies and ensuring workstations are locked when unattended.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-0633 — 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-2014-0633 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