CVE-2017-11463
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 · uneditedIn Ivanti Service Desk (formerly LANDESK Management Suite) versions between 2016.3 and 2017.3, an Unrestricted Direct Object Reference leads to referencing/updating objects belonging to other users. In other words, a normal user can send requests to a specific URI with the target user's username in an HTTP payload in order to retrieve a key/token and use it to access/update objects belonging to other users. Such objects could be user profiles, tickets, incidents, etc.
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 confidenceIvanti Service Desk versions 2016.3-2017.3 contains an Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability where the application accepts user identifiers in HTTP payloads without proper authorization validation. An authenticated attacker can manipulate requests to obtain tokens/keys for other users and subsequently access or modify those users' objects including profiles, tickets, and incidents.
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= 2016.4= 2017.1= 2017.3CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/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.
-
Identify the installed Ivanti Endpoint Manager versionAccess the product's About or System Information page in the administration console, or check the installer/registry for version numberAffected if The version is exactly 2016.4, 2017.1, or 2017.3
-
Confirm the web interface is accessibleAttempt to access the Ivanti Service Desk or Endpoint Manager login page via HTTP/HTTPSAffected if The web interface is exposed and reachable on the network
-
Verify user authentication is enabledCheck that the built-in authentication mechanism is active and users can log in to the web portalAffected if User authentication is enabled and functional, allowing login with user credentials
-
Check for custom authorization configurationsReview the application configuration files or admin settings for any custom authorization modules related to HTTP request handlingAffected if No additional authorization layer exists beyond basic authentication for user identifier handling in requests
You are affected if you are running Ivanti Endpoint Manager version 2016.4, 2017.1, or 2017.3 and the web-based Service Desk interface is accessible to authenticated users.
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 server-side authorization checks to verify the authenticated user has permission to access or modify the requested object, regardless of what user identifier is supplied in the request payload.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-11463 — 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-2017-11463 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