CVE-2015-5686
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 · uneditedParts of the Puppet Enterprise Console 3.x were found to be susceptible to clickjacking and CSRF (Cross-Site Request Forgery) attacks. This would allow an attacker to redirect user input to an untrusted site or hijack a user session.
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 confidencePuppet Enterprise Console 3.x contains clickjacking and CSRF vulnerabilities in its web interface. Clickjacking allows attackers to overlay invisible frames to hijack user clicks, while CSRF exploits authenticated sessions to perform unauthorized actions on behalf of victims.
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>= 3.0.0, < 2015.2.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Check installed Puppet Enterprise versionRun 'puppet --version' or check the console at /about for the exact version number, or examine the installation directory for version filesAffected if Version is 3.0.0 or higher but lower than 2015.2.0
-
Verify console web interface is enabledCheck if the Puppet Enterprise console service is running and accessible on ports 443 or 8140; examine /etc/puppetlabs/httpd/conf.d/console.conf or similar configuration filesAffected if The console web interface is running and publicly or semi-publicly accessible on the network
-
Inspect for missing X-Frame-Options headerUse browser dev tools or curl -I to check HTTP responses from the console; examine httpd configuration files for 'Header set X-Frame-Options' directivesAffected if The X-Frame-Options header is not set in HTTP responses from the console
-
Inspect for missing Content-Security-Policy frame-ancestors directiveCheck HTTP response headers for CSP with frame-ancestors or frame-src directives; examine Apache or nginx configuration for CSP header settingsAffected if Content-Security-Policy header with frame-ancestors is not configured to restrict framing
-
Verify CSRF protection is not implementedReview application logs or proxy logs for CSRF token validation failures; check console configuration files for 'csrf' or 'token' validation settingsAffected if State-changing console operations lack CSRF token validation
User is affected if Puppet Enterprise version is between 3.0.0 and 2015.2.0 (exclusive), the console web interface is enabled, and security headers protecting against clickjacking are not present.
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 data2015.2.0
Deploy X-Frame-Options and Content-Security-Policy headers to prevent clickjacking, and implement CSRF token validation on state-changing operations to prevent cross-site request forgery attacks.
- 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-2015-5686 — 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-2015-5686 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