Email Security ApplianceHardware / appliance · Cisco
CVE-2015-4184
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 anti-spam scanner on Cisco Email Security Appliance (ESA) devices 3.3.1-09, 7.5.1-gpl-022, and 8.5.6-074 allows remote attackers to bypass intended e-mail restrictions via a malformed DNS SPF record, aka Bug IDs CSCuu35853 and CSCuu37733.
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 anti-spam scanner on Cisco Email Security Appliance (ESA) devices can be bypassed via malformed DNS SPF records, allowing remote attackers to send emails that evade intended spam filtering controls.
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
Email Security ApplianceHardware / appliance
= 3.331-09= 7.5.1-gpl-022= 8.5.6-074CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/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.
-
Confirm the device is a Cisco Email Security ApplianceAccess the ESA CLI and run 'version' or check the web interface dashboard to verify the device model is Cisco ESAAffected if The device is not a Cisco ESA - this CVE only affects ESA devices
-
Identify the installed ESA software versionIn the ESA CLI, run the 'version' command or check System Administration > Software Updates in the web interface to retrieve the exact version numberAffected if The installed version matches exactly 3.331-09, 7.5.1-gpl-022, or 8.5.6-074
-
Verify the anti-spam filter is activeCheck the ESA mail flow policy configuration via 'Mail Policies > Incoming Mail Policies' in the web interface or run 'list' in the CLI to confirm anti-spam scanning is enabled for inbound邮件流Affected if Anti-spam scanning is disabled or not applied to the mail flow - the bypass requires the scanner to be active to exploit
-
Confirm SPF checking is configuredNavigate to 'Mail Policies > Sender Verification' in the ESA web interface or check the SPF verification settings in the CLI using 'senderconfig > SPF'Affected if SPF verification is not enabled - the vulnerability specifically affects SPF record parsing in the anti-spam scanner
A user is affected if they are running exactly version 3.331-09, 7.5.1-gpl-022, or 8.5.6-074 on a Cisco ESA with anti-spam and SPF verification 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 patch or upgrade to a fixed Cisco ESA version to remediate the malformed SPF record parsing vulnerability.
Fix this in Email Security Appliance
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-4184 — 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-2015-4184 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