CVE-2017-1200
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 · uneditedIBM BigFix Compliance 1.7 through 1.9.91 (TEMA SUAv1 SCA SCM) does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.This weakness might allow an attacker to spoof a trusted entity by using a man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack. The software might connect to a malicious host while believing it is a trusted host, or the software might be deceived into accepting spoofed data that appears to originate from a trusted host. IBM X-Force ID: 123675.
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 confidenceIBM BigFix Compliance versions 1.7 through 1.9.91 contain a certificate validation vulnerability in the TEMA SUAv1 SCA SCM component. The software fails to properly validate SSL/TLS certificates, allowing attackers to perform man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks. This can cause the software to connect to malicious hosts believing they are trusted, or accept spoofed data appearing to originate from legitimate sources.
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>= 1.7, <= 1.9.91CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 IBM BigFix Compliance is installedCheck system inventory or installed programs list for IBM BigFix Compliance softwareAffected if IBM BigFix Compliance is present on the system
-
Determine installed version of IBM BigFix ComplianceUse system information utility, check program files directory, or run version command specific to BigFix to retrieve the installed version numberAffected if Version number cannot be determined but software is installed
-
Compare version against affected rangeCompare the retrieved version to the affected range: versions 1.7 through 1.9.91Affected if Installed version is greater than or equal to 1.7 AND less than or equal to 1.9.91
-
Identify if TEMA SUAv1 SCA SCM component is in useCheck BigFix configuration files or component list for the TEMA SUAv1 SCA SCM module being enabled or configuredAffected if TEMA SUAv1 SCA SCM component is present and active
User is affected if IBM BigFix Compliance version is between 1.7 and 1.9.91 inclusive AND the TEMA SUAv1 SCA SCM component is enabled or configured.
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 dataUpgrade IBM BigFix Compliance to version 1.9.92 or later which includes proper certificate validation. Alternatively, ensure the software is configured to validate certificates and reject connections to untrusted hosts.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-1200 — 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-2017-1200 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