XenserverApplication · Citrix
CVE-2014-4948
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 · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in Citrix XenServer 6.2 Service Pack 1 and earlier allows attackers to cause a denial of service and obtain sensitive information by modifying the guest virtual hard disk (VHD).
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 confidenceVulnerability in Citrix XenServer 6.2 SP1 and earlier allows attackers with access to modify a guest virtual hard disk (VHD) to trigger a denial of service on the host and potentially expose sensitive information. The vulnerability resides in how XenServer processes VHD files, likely involving improper bounds checking or validation during VHD handling.
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
XenserverApplication
= 6.2.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:P
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 XenServer versionRun 'xe host-list' or check /etc/redhat-release on the XenServer host to determine the exact installed versionAffected if The version is exactly 6.2.0 (Citrix XenServer 6.2 SP1)
-
Confirm VHD disk format is in useRun 'xe vm-disk-list vm=<vm_name>' or examine the storage repository where VM virtual disks are stored to identify if VHD format is being usedAffected if Virtual machines are using VHD (virtual hard disk) format for their virtual disks
-
Verify access to VHD filesInspect file permissions on the storage repository containing VHD files (typically in /var/sr/<uuid>/), and check who has write access to these .vhd filesAffected if Untrusted users or VMs have write access to VHD files on the storage infrastructure
-
Check for unexpected VHD modificationsReview VHD file timestamps and integrity using 'vhd-util scan' or compare current VHD metadata against known-good baselinesAffected if VHD files show unexpected modification timestamps or corrupted VHD header information that could indicate exploitation attempts
You are affected if running XenServer exactly version 6.2.0 with VHD-based virtual disks where untrusted actors can modify those VHD files
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 Citrix XenServer to a version beyond 6.2 Service Pack 1 that includes the security patch for this vulnerability, or apply the relevant Citrix hotfix if available.
Fix this in Xenserver
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-4948 — 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-2014-4948 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