CVE-2017-1203
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 Tivoli Endpoint Manager (for Lifecycle/Power/Patch) Platform and Applications is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM X-Force ID: 123678.
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 confidenceIBM Tivoli Endpoint Manager contains a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in its web interface. Attackers can embed malicious JavaScript code into the Web UI that executes in the browsers of other users viewing the affected content, potentially exposing session credentials or performing actions on behalf of authenticated users.
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= 9.1= 9.1.3= 9.1.4= 9.1.5= 9.1.6= 9.1.7= 9.2= 9.2.0= 9.2.1= 9.2.2= 9.2.3= 9.2.4CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Identify the installed BigFix Platform versionAccess the BigFix console or server and retrieve the platform version information, typically found in the console About section or server documentationAffected if The installed version matches any of the following: 9.1, 9.1.3, 9.1.4, 9.1.5, 9.1.6, 9.1.7, 9.2, 9.2.0, 9.2.1, 9.2.2, 9.2.3, or 9.2.4
-
Confirm the Web UI is accessibleVerify that the BigFix Web UI service is running and accessible by attempting to reach the web interface URLAffected if The web interface is enabled and accessible to users
-
Inspect web interface content for injected scriptsReview user-generated content displayed in the web interface (such as computer names, custom properties, or dashboard elements) for unexpected script tags, javascript: URIs, or event handler attributesAffected if Unexpected or unauthorized script content is present in any user-editable fields within the web UI
-
Review web server logs for XSS attack patternsExamine the BigFix web server logs for suspicious requests containing script tags, <script>, javascript:, or HTML event handlers in parameters that reflect into the interfaceAffected if Logs show injection attempts with malicious script payloads or unusual patterns in user-supplied input fields
The environment is affected if the BigFix Platform version is one of the listed affected versions AND the web interface is enabled and accessible.
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 dataApply the vendor patch when available. In the interim, implement output encoding for all user-supplied data displayed in the web interface and consider restricting user permissions to minimize injection vectors.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-1203 — 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-2017-1203 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