PacketbeatApplication · Elasticsearch
CVE-2017-11480
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 · uneditedPacketbeat versions prior to 5.6.4 are affected by a denial of service flaw in the PostgreSQL protocol handler. If Packetbeat is listening for PostgreSQL traffic and a user is able to send arbitrary network traffic to the monitored port, the attacker could prevent Packetbeat from properly logging other PostgreSQL traffic.
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 confidencePacketbeat versions prior to 5.6.4 contain a denial of service vulnerability in the PostgreSQL protocol handler. An attacker who can send arbitrary network traffic to the port where Packetbeat is listening for PostgreSQL traffic can exploit this flaw to prevent Packetbeat from properly logging legitimate PostgreSQL traffic.
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
PacketbeatApplication
< 5.6.4CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 installed Packetbeat versionRun 'packetbeat -version' or check the package manager (dpkg -l packetbeat, rpm -qi packetbeat) to determine the exact version number installedAffected if The installed version is lower than 5.6.4 (e.g., 5.6.0 through 5.6.3)
-
Verify PostgreSQL protocol is configuredInspect the Packetbeat configuration file (typically at /etc/packetbeat/packetbeat.yml) and look for a 'protocols:' section containing a 'pgsql' or 'postgresql' entry that is not commented outAffected if PostgreSQL protocol is enabled in the Packetbeat configuration
-
Confirm Packetbeat is listening on PostgreSQL portCheck network listeners (netstat -tlnp or ss -tlnp) to see if Packetbeat has an open port configured for PostgreSQL traffic (default port 5432, though Packetbeat may use a different port)Affected if Packetbeat has an exposed port accepting PostgreSQL traffic
-
Assess network accessibility of PostgreSQL portVerify whether the port Packetbeat uses for PostgreSQL monitoring is accessible from untrusted networks using tools like 'nmap -p <port> <target>' or by reviewing firewall rules and network ACLsAffected if The PostgreSQL monitoring port is reachable from networks that are not trusted
You are affected if Packetbeat version is below 5.6.4 AND the PostgreSQL protocol is enabled with an exposed network listener accessible to untrusted attackers.
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 data5.6.4
Upgrade Packetbeat to version 5.6.4 or later. If immediate patching is not possible, restrict network access to the monitored PostgreSQL port to trusted sources only.
Fix this in Packetbeat
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation1.0 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 $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-11480 — 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-2017-11480 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