Telepresence Server SoftwareApplication · Cisco
CVE-2015-6284
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 · uneditedBuffer overflow in the Conference Control Protocol API implementation in Cisco TelePresence Server software before 4.1(2.33) on 7010, MSE 8710, Multiparty Media 310 and 320, and Virtual Machine devices allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device crash) via a crafted URL, aka Bug ID CSCuu28277.
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 confidenceBuffer overflow vulnerability in the Conference Control Protocol API implementation of Cisco TelePresence Server software versions before 4.1(2.33). The vulnerability is triggered when processing a crafted URL, causing the device to crash and result in denial of service.
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
Telepresence Server SoftwareApplication
= 2.3\(1.55\)= 2.3\(1.57\)= 3.0\(2.24\)= 3.0\(2.46\)= 3.0\(2.48\)= 3.0\(2.49\)= 3.1\(1.80\)= 3.1\(1.82\)= 3.1\(1.95\)= 3.1\(1.96\)= 3.1\(1.97\)= 3.1\(1.98\)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
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/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 Cisco TelePresence Server software versionAccess the device admin interface or use CLI command 'show version' to retrieve the software version informationAffected if The installed version matches one of the affected versions: 2.3(1.55), 2.3(1.57), 3.0(2.24), 3.0(2.46), 3.0(2.48), 3.0(2.49), 3.1(1.80), 3.1(1.82), 3.1(1.95), 3.1(1.96), 3.1(1.97), or 3.1(1.98)
-
Confirm device model is affectedCheck the device model using 'show hardware' or via the admin interface. Affected models include 7010, MSE 8710, Multiparty Media 310/320, and Virtual MachineAffected if The device is one of the affected models running a vulnerable software version
-
Determine if Conference Control Protocol API is exposedCheck the API configuration settings in the web interface under 'API Settings' or via CLI command 'show api' to see if the Conference Control Protocol API is enabledAffected if The Conference Control Protocol API is enabled and accessible from network segments that could send crafted requests
A user is affected if their Cisco TelePresence Server is a 7010, MSE 8710, Multiparty Media 310/320, or Virtual Machine model running software version 2.3(x), 3.0(x), or 3.1(x) listed in the affected versions, with the Conference Control Protocol API enabled and reachable.
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 dataUpgrade Cisco TelePresence Server software to version 4.1(2.33) or later on affected 7010, MSE 8710, Multiparty Media 310/320, and Virtual Machine devices.
Fix this in Telepresence Server Software
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-6284 — 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-2015-6284 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