CVE-2015-0985
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 · uneditedCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in XZERES 442SR OS on 442SR wind turbines allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of admins for requests that modify the default user's password via a GET request.
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 request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in XZERES 442SR OS allows remote attackers to hijack admin authentication by tricking administrators into visiting malicious URLs that modify the default user's password via a GET request, exploiting the lack of anti-CSRF tokens or referer validation.
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 dataall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/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 Xzeres 442SR device in your environmentLocate and inventory network devices to determine if Xzeres 442SR OS or Xzeres 442sr hardware is present on your networkAffected if The device is present and running its web management interface
-
Access the web management interfaceNavigate to the device IP address via HTTP to reach the admin login pageAffected if The web interface is accessible without authentication restrictions
-
Verify password modification methodAttempt to modify the admin password using a GET request (for example, by observing whether the device accepts password change parameters via URL query string)Affected if The device allows password changes via GET request parameters without requiring a POST form submission
-
Check for anti-CSRF protectionExamine the password change form or request mechanism for the presence of anti-CSRF tokens, unique session identifiers, or cryptographic nonce valuesAffected if No anti-CSRF token or unique request identifier is required for password modification operations
-
Check referer validationSubmit a password change request from an external or mismatched referer header to see if the device validates the request originAffected if The device accepts password change requests without validating the HTTP referer header
Your environment is affected if you have a Xzeres 442SR device with its web interface exposed and password modifications can be performed via GET requests without anti-CSRF tokens or referer validation.
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 dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens for all state-changing operations including password changes, validate request referers, and change the password modification from a GET to a POST request method.
- 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-2015-0985 — 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-2015-0985 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