CVE-2015-0171
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 · uneditedDirectory traversal vulnerability in IBM Security SiteProtector System 3.0 before 3.0.0.7, 3.1 before 3.1.0.4, and 3.1.1 before 3.1.1.2 allows remote authenticated users to write to arbitrary files via unspecified vectors.
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 confidenceDirectory traversal vulnerability in IBM Security SiteProtector System allows authenticated users to write to arbitrary files on the system due to insufficient path validation in file upload or write operations. The vulnerability affects versions 3.0 before 3.0.0.7, 3.1 before 3.1.0.4, and 3.1.1 before 3.1.1.2.
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= 3.0= 3.0.0.1= 3.0.0.2= 3.0.0.3= 3.0.0.4= 3.0.0.5= 3.0.0.6= 3.1.0.0= 3.1.0.1= 3.1.0.2= 3.1.0.3= 3.1.1.0CVSS 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
- Single
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:P/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 IBM Security SiteProtector installationLook for the SiteProtector installation directory, typically under C:\Program Files\IBM\SiteProtector or /opt/IBM/SiteProtector on Unix systems. Check for the SiteProtector service running on the system.Affected if The product is not installed or no service is found.
-
Determine installed versionLocate the version file or check the product About/Status page within the SiteProtector admin interface. Common locations: installation_path\status\version.txt or look for SPVersion in registry on Windows systems.Affected if The version matches 3.0.x before 3.0.0.7, 3.1.0.x before 3.1.0.4, or 3.1.1.0 before 3.1.1.2.
-
Verify administrative access existsCheck if administrative or operator accounts are configured in SiteProtector by examining the user management section or user configuration files in the installation directory.Affected if At least one authenticated administrative or operator user account exists in the system.
-
Confirm web interface is accessibleVerify the SiteProtector web console is reachable via HTTP/HTTPS on the configured port (typically 443 or 8443). This is required for the file upload operation to be exploited.Affected if The web interface is exposed and accepts authentication.
You are affected if IBM Security SiteProtector System is installed with a version in the 3.0.x (before 3.0.0.7), 3.1.0.x (before 3.1.0.4), or 3.1.1.x (before 3.1.1.2) range AND the web interface with authenticated user access is 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 vendor patches to reach version 3.0.0.7, 3.1.0.4, or 3.1.1.2 as appropriate for the deployed version. Restrict administrative access to trusted personnel only until patched.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-0171 — 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-2015-0171 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