CVE-2015-3326
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 · uneditedTrend Micro ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange (SMEX) 10.2 before Hot Fix Build 3318 and 11.0 before Hot Fix Build 4180 creates session IDs for the web console using a random number generator with predictable values, which makes it easier for remote attackers to bypass authentication via a brute force attack.
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 confidenceTrend Micro ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange generates session IDs for its web console using a random number generator that produces predictable values. This weakness allows remote attackers to potentially guess or brute force valid session IDs and bypass authentication to gain unauthorized access to the web console.
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= 10.2= 11.0CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Confirm Trend Micro ScanMail is installedCheck system for ScanMail installation by looking for the ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange application in Windows Programs and Features, or locate the installation directory (typically under Program Files\Trend Micro\ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange)Affected if The product is not installed or only related components without the full ScanMail installation exist
-
Identify the installed ScanMail versionOpen the ScanMail console or check the program files for version information. The version is typically displayed in the main console window or in the About section, appearing as either 10.2 or 11.0Affected if The installed version is exactly 10.2 or exactly 11.0 (not a later version)
-
Check the build number of the installationIn the ScanMail console, access Help or About to view the build number. For version 10.2, look for build 3318 or higher. For version 11.0, look for build 4180 or higherAffected if The build number is below 3318 for version 10.2, or below 4180 for version 11.0
-
Verify web console accessibilityCheck if the ScanMail web console is enabled and accessible by attempting to reach it via browser (typically https://localhost:port/smex or similar URL pattern used by the installation)Affected if The web console is enabled and reachable from network locations (increases exposure to the session prediction vulnerability)
A system is affected if it runs ScanMail version 10.2 with build below 3318, or version 11.0 with build below 4180, and has the web console enabled.
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 vendor-supplied hot fixes: Update to SMEX 10.2 Build 3318 or later, or SMEX 11.0 Build 4180 or later. Prior to deployment, ensure backups of configuration and data are available and schedule a maintenance window.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,304.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-3326 — 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-2015-3326 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