CVE-2017-11717
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 · uneditedMetInfo through 5.3.17 accepts the same CAPTCHA response for 120 seconds, which makes it easier for remote attackers to bypass intended challenge requirements by modifying the client-server data stream, as demonstrated by the login/findpass page.
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 confidenceMetInfo through version 5.3.17 uses a static CAPTCHA response that remains valid for 120 seconds, allowing attackers to capture a valid CAPTCHA answer and reuse it within that window to bypass the challenge on repeated login or password recovery attempts.
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<= 5.3.17CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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.
-
Check MetInfo versionLocate the version file or admin panel about page to identify the installed MetInfo version numberAffected if Version is 5.3.17 or lower (<= 5.3.17)
-
Identify CAPTCHA implementationExamine the CAPTCHA generation code in the login and password recovery modules to determine if a static response is used for all requestsAffected if The same CAPTCHA answer is returned across multiple requests rather than generating unique values per request
-
Verify CAPTCHA session durationInspect the CAPTCHA session or token expiration setting in the configuration or source codeAffected if The CAPTCHA remains valid for approximately 120 seconds or longer without requiring a new challenge
-
Check CAPTCHA reuse behaviorTest whether a captured CAPTCHA answer can be successfully submitted multiple times within the valid windowAffected if The same CAPTCHA answer can be replayed to bypass the challenge on repeated attempts
The environment is affected if running MetInfo version 5.3.17 or lower and the CAPTCHA system uses a static response valid for around 120 seconds, allowing replay within that window.
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 per-request unique CAPTCHA tokens with short expiration (e.g., 30-60 seconds) and invalidate the CAPTCHA after each validation attempt to prevent replay attacks.
- Consultation2.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-11717 — 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-2017-11717 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