CVE-2015-3972
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 · uneditedThe web interface on Janitza UMG 508, 509, 511, 604, and 605 devices supports only short PIN values for authentication, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain access 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 confidenceThe Janitza UMG 508, 509, 511, 604, and 605 devices have a weak authentication mechanism in their web interface that uses short PIN values, making them vulnerable to brute-force attacks where attackers can systematically guess PINs due to the limited keyspace.
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 versionsall versionsall 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
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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 Janitza UMG devices on the networkScan network ranges for devices responding on HTTP/HTTPS (ports 80, 443, 8080). Look for Janitza-specific HTTP headers, favicon, or login page content containing 'UMG' or 'Janitza'. Note the model number from the web interface banner or device documentation.Affected if A Janitza UMG 508, 509, 511, 604, or 605 device is discovered on the network.
-
Confirm web interface is accessibleAttempt to reach the device web interface via browser. Observe whether the login page loads and requires authentication.Affected if The device web interface is reachable and exposes a login prompt.
-
Verify PIN-based authentication is in useOn the login page, confirm that authentication relies on a numeric PIN rather than a username/password combination, certificate, or other multi-factor method.Affected if The authentication mechanism uses PIN-only login.
-
Assess PIN length requirementsAccess device settings or admin configuration pages if authorized. Look for PIN configuration or password policy settings. Attempt to set a short PIN to verify if the device accepts it.Affected if The device permits short PINs (typically 4-6 digits) without enforcing longer or more complex credentials.
If a Janitza UMG 508, 509, 511, 604, or 605 device with PIN-only web authentication is present and exposed on the network, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 firmware updates when available to enforce longer/complex PINs, or implement network-level controls such as VPN access, IP allow-listing, or rate-limiting/IPS to block brute-force attempts.
- 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-2015-3972 — 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-2015-3972 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