DryApplication · Jenkins
CVE-2017-1000103
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 custom Details view of the Static Analysis Utilities based DRY Plugin, was vulnerable to a persisted cross-site scripting vulnerability: Malicious users able to influence the input to this plugin could insert arbitrary HTML into this view.
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 confidenceStored XSS vulnerability in the DRY Plugin's custom Details view within the Static Analysis Utilities. Attackers with the ability to influence plugin input can inject arbitrary HTML/JavaScript that persists and executes when other users view the affected Details page.
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
DryApplication
<= 2.48CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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.
-
Verify Jenkins Dry plugin is installedNavigate to Jenkins > Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed tab and search for 'Dry' in the filter, or check the $JENKINS_HOME/plugins directory for the dry plugin folderAffected if The Dry plugin is present in the Jenkins installation
-
Check the installed Dry plugin versionOn the Installed plugins page, locate the Dry plugin and note the version number displayed in the 'Version' column, or inspect the $JENKINS_HOME/plugins/dry/META-INF/MANIFEST.MF file for the Plugin-Version attributeAffected if The version is 2.48 or lower
-
Confirm custom Details view is in useNavigate to a build job that uses Dry plugin results, then access the Static Analysis Utilities section and check if the 'Custom Details View' option is configured or if users are viewing the custom details page rather than the default viewAffected if The custom Details view is enabled or being accessed by users viewing analysis results
-
Verify user input can influence DRY resultsReview whether users have the ability to upload, modify, or influence the DRY analysis input files (such as dry.xml reports) that the plugin processes, or check job configurations for publishing DRY resultsAffected if Users can supply or modify the analysis reports processed by the Dry plugin
The environment is affected if Jenkins Dry plugin version 2.48 or lower is installed AND the custom Details view from Static Analysis Utilities is being used, allowing user-controlled input to persist and execute as malicious HTML/JavaScript.
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 dataImplement proper output encoding/sanitization for all user-controlled input rendered in the Details view to prevent HTML injection and script execution.
Fix this in Dry
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-1000103 — 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-2017-1000103 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