CVE-2014-6086
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 · uneditedIBM Security Access Manager for Mobile 8.x before 8.0.1 and Security Access Manager for Web 7.x before 7.0.0 FP10 and 8.x before 8.0.1 do not ensure that HTTPS is used, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information by sniffing the network during an HTTP session.
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 confidenceIBM Security Access Manager for Mobile 8.x before 8.0.1 and Security Access Manager for Web versions 7.x before FP10 and 8.x before 8.0.1 fail to enforce HTTPS for user sessions. This allows sensitive authentication and session data to be transmitted in cleartext over HTTP, which can be intercepted by network sniffers.
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= 8.0= 7.0= 8.0CVSS 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
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/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 the installed IBM Security Access Manager product and versionRun the version command appropriate to your installation (often 'clmversion' or check the product dashboard in the admin console)Affected if The version is ISAM for Mobile 8.0, ISAM for Web 7.0, or ISAM for Web 8.0 (prior to FP10 for 7.x or 8.0.1 for 8.x)
-
Determine if the appliance is configured to accept HTTP connectionsCheck the web server or reverse proxy configuration in front of ISAM, or the ISAM listener configuration, for any enabled HTTP (port 80) listenersAffected if HTTP listeners are enabled on any interface that handles authentication or session traffic
-
Verify whether HTTPS enforcement is configured for authentication endpointsInspect the ISAM policy configuration or web server rules for directives that redirect or enforce HTTPS for /mycert, /saml, /oauth, or login pathsAffected if Authentication paths are accessible over HTTP without forced redirect to HTTPS, or no HSTS headers are applied to these endpoints
-
Check session cookie security settingsExamine the session cookie configuration (often in isamconfig or webseal configuration) for the 'secure' flag on session cookiesAffected if Session cookies are not marked with the 'Secure' attribute, allowing them to be transmitted over HTTP
You are affected if you run ISAM for Mobile 8.0, ISAM for Web 7.0, or ISAM for Web 8.0 AND your configuration allows authentication or session data to flow over unencrypted HTTP connections.
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 dataEnforce HTTPS for all authentication and sensitive data transmission paths in the IBM Security Access Manager configuration. Apply the vendor patches (8.0.1 for Mobile 8.x, FP10 for Web 7.x, 8.0.1 for Web 8.x) to address the vulnerability.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-6086 — 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-2014-6086 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