Nx OsOperating system · Cisco
CVE-2014-2200
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 NX-OS 5.0 before 5.0(5) on Nexus 7000 devices, when local authentication and multiple VDCs are enabled, allows remote authenticated users to gain privileges within an unintended VDC via an SSH session to a management interface, aka Bug ID CSCti11629.
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 confidenceA vulnerability in Cisco NX-OS 5.0 before 5.0(5) on Nexus 7000 devices allows remote authenticated users to gain privileges within an unintended VDC (Virtual Device Context) when local authentication and multiple VDCs are enabled. The issue stems from improper VDC context isolation during SSH management sessions, allowing authenticated users to escape their assigned VDC boundaries.
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
Nx OsOperating system
= 5.0\(3\)n1\(1\)= 5.0\(3\)n1\(1a\)= 5.0\(3\)n1\(1b\)= 5.0\(3\)n1\(1c\)= 5.0\(3\)n2\(1\)= 5.0\(3\)n2\(2\)= 5.0\(3\)n2\(2a\)= 5.0\(3\)n2\(2b\)= 5.0\(3\)u1\(1a\)= 5.0\(3\)u1\(1b\)= 5.0\(3\)u1\(1d\)= 5.0\(3\)u1\(2\)CVSS 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
- Authentication
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:H/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 NX-OS versionRun 'show version' on the Nexus 7000 device and note the installed NX-OS versionAffected if Version is 5.0(3) with any of the suffixes n1(1), n1(1a), n1(1b), n1(1c), n2(1), n2(2), n2(2a), n2(2b), u1(1a), u1(1b), u1(1d), or u1(2) - or any version between 5.0 and 5.0(5)
-
Verify local authentication is enabledRun 'show running-config | include aaa' to check authentication configurationAffected if Output shows 'aaa authentication login default local' or similar local authentication settings that do not rely exclusively on external AAA servers
-
Confirm multiple VDCs existRun 'show vdc' to list all Virtual Device Contexts configured on the deviceAffected if Output shows more than one VDC (the default VDC plus at least one additional user-created VDC)
-
Check SSH management accessRun 'show ssh' to see if SSH management sessions are permittedAffected if SSH is enabled and available for management access to the device
The environment is affected if the device runs NX-OS version 5.0(3) through 5.0(4) AND has local authentication enabled with multiple VDCs configured, allowing SSH users to potentially escape VDC boundaries.
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 Cisco NX-OS to version 5.0(5) or later. Alternatively, if upgrade is not feasible, review and enforce strict VDC access control policies to limit user access to their designated VDCs only.
Fix this in Nx Os
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-2200 — 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-2014-2200 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