CVE-2015-3987
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 · uneditedMultiple unquoted Windows search path vulnerabilities in the (1) Client Management and (2) Gateway in McAfee ePO Deep Command 2.1 and 2.2 before HF 1058831 allow local users to gain privileges via unspecified vectors.
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 confidenceUnquoted Windows service path vulnerabilities in McAfee ePO Deep Command 2.1 and 2.2 allow local privilege escalation. When service executable paths contain spaces and aren't enclosed in quotes, Windows attempts to execute binaries in intermediate directories, potentially letting attackers place malicious executables in those paths to gain elevated privileges.
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= 2.1= 2.2CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/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.
-
Verify McAfee ePO Deep Command is installedCheck Windows registry at HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\ for an entry named 'McAfee ePO Deep Command' or run 'Get-WmiObject -Class Win32_Product | Select-Object Name, Version' to list installed productsAffected if No entry or product named 'McAfee ePO Deep Command' is found on the system
-
Confirm the installed version is 2.1 or 2.2If the product is found, retrieve its version value from the registry (typically in the same Uninstall key) or via 'wmic product where "Name like '%McAfee ePO%'" get Version'Affected if The version listed is exactly 2.1 or exactly 2.2
-
Identify McAfee ePO Deep Command servicesRun 'sc query type= service state= all' to list all services, then filter for those with 'McAfee' or 'ePO' or 'Deep Command' in the service name using 'sc queryex' or 'Get-Service'Affected if Any services associated with McAfee ePO Deep Command are present on the system
-
Check for unquoted service paths with spacesFor each identified service, run 'sc qc <servicename>' and examine the BINARY_PATH_NAME field; if the path contains spaces but is not enclosed in double quotes, it is vulnerableAffected if The BINARY_PATH_NAME contains spaces and lacks surrounding double quotes (for example: C:\Program Files\McAfee\something.exe is vulnerable while "C:\Program Files\McAfee\something.exe" is not)
The system is affected if McAfee ePO Deep Command version 2.1 or 2.2 is installed AND any of its associated services have unquoted executable paths containing spaces.
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 McAfee hotfix 1058831 or later. Alternatively, identify the vulnerable service paths and ensure only privileged users have write access to intermediate directories in the path.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-3987 — 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-2015-3987 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