Unified Web And E Mail Interaction ManagerApplication · Cisco

CVE-2015-4299

MEDIUM · 5.5 CVSS v2.0 Published 2015-08-19
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
61/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
Cisco Unified Web and E-Mail Interaction Manager 9.0(2) improperly performs authorization, which allows remote authenticated users to remove default messaging-queue system folders via unspecified vectors, aka Bug ID CSCuo89046.

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 confidence

This is an authorization flaw in Cisco Unified Web and E-Mail Interaction Manager 9.0(2) where authenticated users can improperly remove default messaging-queue system folders. The vulnerability allows any low-privileged authenticated user to delete critical system folders that should be protected, potentially disrupting email and messaging services.

MitigationApply the vendor patch for Bug ID CSCuo89046 when available, and verify that system folders are protected from deletion by non-admin users through proper role-based access 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
Unified Web And E Mail Interaction ManagerApplication
Affected:= 9.0\(2\)

CVSS 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
Single
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
Partial
Availability
Partial

AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Verify the installed version of Cisco Unified Web and E-Mail Interaction Manager
    Locate the installed product version through the software inventory, about page, or version command for the Cisco Unified Web and E-Mail Interaction Manager installation
    Affected if The installed version is exactly 9.0(2)
  2. Confirm presence of messaging-queue system folders
    Access the system folder configuration or file system where default messaging-queue system folders are stored, and verify they exist
    Affected if Critical messaging-queue system folders are missing or have been deleted from their expected default locations
  3. Review user role permissions for system folder access
    Examine the role-based access control (RBAC) configuration for user roles, specifically checking whether low-privileged or non-admin authenticated users have delete or modify permissions on system folders
    Affected if Low-privileged authenticated user roles are granted delete permissions on messaging-queue system folders
  4. Check for recent unauthorized system folder deletions
    Audit system logs, folder modification logs, or deletion history for messaging-queue system folders to identify any deletion events performed by non-admin accounts
    Affected if System folder deletion events were performed by authenticated users without administrative privileges

A user is affected if they have Cisco Unified Web and E-Mail Interaction Manager version 9.0(2) installed and low-privileged authenticated users can delete or have deleted messaging-queue system folders.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply the vendor patch for Bug ID CSCuo89046 when available, and verify that system folders are protected from deletion by non-admin users through proper role-based access controls.

Fix this in Unified Web And E Mail Interaction Manager Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-4299 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2015-4299 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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