CVE-2014-8309
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 · uneditedSAP BusinessObjects 4.0 and BusinessObjects XI (BOXI) R2 and 3.1 generates error messages for a failed logon attempt with different time delays depending on whether the user account exists, which allows remote attackers to enumerate valid usernames via SecEnterprise authentication requests to the Session web service.
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 confidenceSAP BusinessObjects contains a username enumeration vulnerability where failed authentication attempts produce different response delays depending on whether the submitted username is valid. This timing side-channel allows attackers to identify valid user accounts by measuring response times during SecEnterprise authentication requests to the Session web service.
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= 3.1= r2CVSS 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 if SAP BusinessObjects is installedCheck for running processes named 'boe', 'bobj', 'corba', or look for SAP BusinessObjects installation directories such as C:\Program Files\SAP BusinessObjects or /opt/sap/bobjAffected if No SAP BusinessObjects installation found means not affected
-
Determine the installed BusinessObjects versionAccess the CMC (Central Management Console) typically at http://hostname:8080/CMC or check version info in the installation directory's README or about pageAffected if Version is 4.0, XI 3.1, or XI R2 - other versions are not affected by this specific CVE
-
Verify the Session web service is accessibleAttempt to access the Session web service endpoint - typically at http://hostname:8080/session or https://hostname:8443/sessionAffected if Service is unreachable or disabled reduces exposure but does not eliminate the vulnerability if the product version is affected
-
Test for timing-based username enumerationSend two authentication requests with different usernames (one likely valid, one invalid) to the Session web service and measure response times using a tool like curl or Burp Suite Repeater - repeat multiple times to account for network varianceAffected if Response times consistently differ based on username validity indicates the timing side-channel vulnerability is present
User is affected if SAP BusinessObjects version 4.0, XI 3.1, or XI R2 is running with the Session web service accessible and timing differences are observable between valid and invalid usernames during authentication.
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 dataNormalize authentication response times to be consistent regardless of whether the username exists, or implement account lockout/throttling mechanisms to prevent automated enumeration attacks.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-8309 — 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-2014-8309 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