Email Security ApplianceHardware / appliance · Cisco
CVE-2015-6285
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 · uneditedFormat string vulnerability in Cisco Email Security Appliance (ESA) 7.6.0 and 8.0.0 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory overwrite or service outage) via format string specifiers in an HTTP request, aka Bug ID CSCug21497.
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 confidenceFormat string vulnerability in Cisco Email Security Appliance (ESA) versions 7.6.0 and 8.0.0 allows remote attackers to inject format string specifiers into HTTP requests, causing memory corruption that leads to denial of service through memory overwrite or service outage.
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
Email Security ApplianceHardware / appliance
= 7.6.0= 8.0.0CVSS 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
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the ESA firmware versionLog into the ESA CLI or web interface and locate the system version information. In the CLI, this is typically obtained via the 'version' or 'show version' command.Affected if The displayed version is exactly 7.6.0 or exactly 8.0.0
-
Confirm the exact version numberVerify the full version string matches one of the affected releases. Check both the major version and any build/sub-version identifiers to ensure an exact match.Affected if The version reads precisely 7.6.0 or precisely 8.0.0 (not 7.6.0.x or 8.0.0.x variants)
-
Determine if HTTP services are enabledCheck the ESA configuration for HTTP or HTTPS listener settings. In the CLI, use 'listenerconfig' or check the web interface under Network > HTTP/HTTPS listeners.Affected if An HTTP or HTTPS listener is active and accessible from the network
-
Verify the HTTP interface is network-reachableAttempt to reach the ESA HTTP/HTTPS interface from a remote system using a browser or curl command, or check network access control lists.Affected if The HTTP service responds to requests from external or untrusted networks
You are affected if your ESA is running exactly version 7.6.0 or exactly 8.0.0 and has an HTTP listener enabled and 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.
From vendor dataApply Cisco security updates/patches for this vulnerability (contact Cisco for specific fixed versions) or implement network-level filtering to block HTTP requests containing format string specifiers as an interim measure.
Fix this in Email Security Appliance
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,880.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-6285 — 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-2015-6285 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