CVE-2015-6259
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 JavaServer Pages (JSP) component in Cisco Integrated Management Controller (IMC) Supervisor before 1.0.0.1 and UCS Director (formerly Cloupia Unified Infrastructure Controller) before 5.2.0.1 allows remote attackers to write to arbitrary files via crafted HTTP requests, aka Bug IDs CSCus36435 and CSCus62625.
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 JSP component in Cisco IMC Supervisor before 1.0.0.1 and UCS Director before 5.2.0.1 contains an arbitrary file write vulnerability that allows remote unauthenticated attackers to write files to arbitrary locations on the filesystem via crafted HTTP requests.
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<= 1.0.0.0<= 5.2.0.0= 3.4_base= 4.0_base= 4.1_base= 5.0.0.0= 5.0.0.1= 5.0.0.2= 5.0.0.3= 5.1.0.0= 5.1.0.1CVSS 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
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/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.
-
Identify installed productDetermine whether Cisco IMC Supervisor or Cisco UCS Director is deployed in your environment. Check product documentation or web interface login page for product name.Affected if Product is Cisco IMC Supervisor or Cisco UCS Director
-
Check IMC Supervisor versionAccess the IMC Supervisor web interface and navigate to the About or Administration section to view the installed version number.Affected if Version is 1.0.0.0 or earlier
-
Check UCS Director versionAccess the UCS Director web interface and navigate to the About or Administration section to view the installed version number.Affected if Version is 5.2.0.0 or earlier, or matches one of these base versions: 3.4_base, 4.0_base, 4.1_base, 5.0.0.0, 5.0.0.1, 5.0.0.2, 5.0.0.3, 5.1.0.0, or 5.1.0.1
-
Verify JSP endpoint accessibilityFrom an external perspective, determine if the JSP component endpoint is reachable over the network on the HTTP/HTTPS ports used by the product.Affected if The JSP interface is exposed to network without proper authentication restrictions
-
Review access logs for suspicious file write attemptsExamine HTTP access logs for unusual POST requests to JSP endpoints with file path parameters or unexpected payload patterns.Affected if Logs show unauthenticated requests attempting to write files to unusual paths
Your environment is affected if you are running Cisco IMC Supervisor version 1.0.0.0 or earlier, or Cisco UCS Director version 5.2.0.0 or earlier (including the specific base versions listed), and the JSP component is network-accessible.
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.
dbcve · scopedApply the vendor patches by upgrading to IMC Supervisor 1.0.0.1 or later and UCS Director 5.2.0.1 or later to remediate this arbitrary file write vulnerability.
IMC Supervisor 1.0.0.1 or UCS Director 5.2.0.1
- Back up all current configurations and data for the Cisco IMC Supervisor or UCS Director system
- Download the fixed version (1.0.0.1 for IMC Supervisor or 5.2.0.1 for UCS Director) from Cisco's official download channels
- Review Cisco's release notes and upgrade documentation for the specific version before proceeding
- Follow Cisco's documented upgrade procedure for the respective product, ensuring proper downtime planning
- After upgrade, verify the system is running the patched version and confirm the JSP input validation vulnerability is resolved
- Validate that existing workflows and integrations continue to function correctly post-upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA5.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,216.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-6259 — 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-2015-6259 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