Jboss PortalApplication · Redhat
CVE-2015-5176
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 PortletRequestDispatcher in PortletBridge, as used in Red Hat JBoss Portal 6.2.0, does not properly enforce the security constraints of servlets, which allows remote attackers to gain access to resources via a request that asks to render a non-JSF resource.
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 confidenceThe PortletRequestDispatcher in PortletBridge (used in Red Hat JBoss Portal 6.2.0) fails to properly enforce security constraints defined for servlets. This allows remote attackers to bypass access controls by crafting requests that ask to render non-JSF resources, potentially gaining unauthorized access to protected resources.
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
Jboss PortalApplication
= 6.2.0CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/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.
-
Identify JBoss Portal installationLocate the JBoss Portal installation directory and check version metadata files (such as version.txt, manifest, or product.conf) or run the version command for the JBoss instanceAffected if The installed version is exactly 6.2.0 or falls within the affected range without patches applied
-
Verify PortletBridge component presenceSearch for the PortletBridge library JAR files in the application server's lib or modules directory, or check the application's WEB-INF/lib folder for portletbridge-api.jar or portletbridge-impl.jarAffected if PortletBridge is deployed and actively handling portlet requests
-
Check for servlet security constraintsReview the application's web.xml and jboss-web.xml deployment descriptors for <security-constraint> definitions that protect servlet resourcesAffected if Security constraints are defined for servlet or resource paths that could be bypassed via non-JSF resource rendering through PortletBridge
-
Test for access control bypassSend a crafted request through the portlet container that requests a non-JSF resource (such as a direct servlet path) that should be protected, and observe if access is granted when it should be deniedAffected if Requests to protected non-JSF resources via PortletBridge return content that should require authentication/authorization
A user is affected if they are running Red Hat JBoss Portal 6.2.0 with PortletBridge handling requests and have servlet security constraints that could be bypassed through non-JSF resource rendering paths.
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 dataUpdate PortletBridge/JBoss Portal to a patched version that properly enforces servlet security constraints, or implement additional access control measures for non-JSF resource rendering paths.
Fix this in Jboss Portal
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
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 locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-5176 — 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-2015-5176 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