CVE-2015-0943
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 · uneditedBasware Banking (Maksuliikenne) before 9.10.0.0 does not encrypt communication between the client and the backend server, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to obtain encryption keys, user credentials, and other sensitive information by sniffing the network or modify this traffic by inserting packets into the client-server data stream.
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 confidenceBasware Banking (Maksuliikenne) versions prior to 9.10.0.0 transmit sensitive data including user credentials and encryption keys over unencrypted HTTP connections. This allows man-in-the-middle attackers to passively sniff network traffic to capture credentials/keys or actively inject malicious packets into the client-server data stream.
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<= 8.90.07CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/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 Basware Banking versionOpen the Basware Banking application and navigate to Help > About or check the program entry in Add/Remove Programs to determine the exact installed version numberAffected if version displayed is 8.90.07 or earlier (any version <= 8.90.07)
-
Inspect network traffic configurationWithin Basware Banking settings, locate the server connection or banking integration settings panel to identify whether HTTP or HTTPS is selected for communicating with the banking serverAffected if the connection is configured to use unencrypted HTTP (port 80) rather than encrypted HTTPS (port 443)
-
Verify protocol in connection logsCheck Basware Banking application logs or transaction history files for connection strings or server URLs; look for http:// versus https:// prefixes in the server addressesAffected if server URLs in logs or configuration show http:// rather than https://
-
Confirm sensitive data transmission methodUse network monitoring tools (such as Wireshark or netstat) to observe outbound connections from the Basware Banking host while the application communicates with the banking serverAffected if plaintext HTTP traffic containing credentials or encryption keys is observed leaving the client machine
You are affected if Basware Banking version is 8.90.07 or earlier AND the application communicates with the server over unencrypted HTTP instead of HTTPS.
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 to Basware Banking version 9.10.0.0 or later which implements encrypted communication. If immediate upgrade is not possible, ensure network-level protections such as VPN tunnels are enforced for all client-server communications.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-0943 — 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-2015-0943 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