Unified Communications ManagerApplication · Cisco
CVE-2015-0749
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 · uneditedA vulnerability in Cisco Unified Communications Manager could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct a cross-site scripting (XSS) attack on the affected software. The vulnerabilities is due to improper input validation of certain parameters passed to the affected software. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by convincing a user to follow a malicious link. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary script code in the context of the affected site or allow the attacker to access sensitive browser-based information.
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 confidenceCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Cisco Unified Communications Manager due to improper input validation of certain parameters. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can inject malicious scripts by tricking users into following malicious links, enabling execution of arbitrary code in the context of the affected site or access to sensitive browser-based information.
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
Unified Communications ManagerApplication
<= 10.5\(2.10000.5\)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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 Cisco CUCM versionLog into the Cisco Unified Communications Manager Administration console and navigate to About > Version, or run the CLI command 'show version' via the RTMT or SSH to the CUCM serverAffected if The installed version is 10.5(2.10000.5) or any earlier version within the 10.5.x train, meaning version is less than or equal to 10.5(2.10000.5)
-
Confirm web administration interface is accessibleAttempt to access the CUCM admin web interface via HTTPS on port 8443 or verify the service is running using the CLI command 'utils service list' to check Cisco Tomcat or Cisco CallManager service statusAffected if The web-based administration interface (Cisco CallManager Serviceability or Administration) is exposed and reachable on the network
-
Check if anonymous or unauthenticated access is permittedReview the CUCM Enterprise Parameter 'Web Publishing' settings and verify whether the 'Enable Admin Web Interface' is set to enabled for unauthenticated access, or inspect the Cisco Tomcat service configurationAffected if The web interface allows unauthenticated or weakly authenticated access to input-handling pages without proper session validation
-
Review access control lists and URL filteringExamine any perimeter firewall rules or internal ACLs protecting the CUCM management interface to determine if the web ports (80, 443, 8443) are exposed to untrusted networksAffected if The CUCM web interface is accessible from untrusted networks or the internet without filtering
You are affected if your Cisco Unified Communications Manager is running version 10.5(2.10000.5) or earlier AND the administration web interface is network-accessible to unauthenticated users.
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 the relevant Cisco security patch for CUCM when available. Until then, implement URL filtering, user security awareness training to avoid clicking untrusted links, and consider deploying a WAF to help block XSS attack vectors.
Fix this in Unified Communications Manager
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-2015-0749 — 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-2015-0749 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