CVE-2017-1208
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 Maximo Asset Management 7.1, 7.5, and 7.6 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: 123778.
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 Maximo Asset Management 7.1/7.5/7.6 contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability in the Web UI. Attackers can embed malicious JavaScript code that executes in the browsers of other users viewing the affected interface, potentially enabling session hijacking and credentials disclosure within trusted sessions.
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= 7.1= 7.1.1= 7.5= 7.6CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 Maximo Asset Management versionCheck the About Maximo Asset Management information in the application or look for version files in the installation directory (such as build level or version.properties files)Affected if The installed version is 7.1, 7.1.1, 7.5, or 7.6 (including any sub-versions within these releases)
-
Verify the Web UI module is accessibleConfirm that the Maximo web interface is deployed and accessible by logging into the application through a browserAffected if The Web UI is accessible and users can interact with web-based input forms
-
Review user-supplied input fields in the Web UIInspect forms and input fields in the Maximo web interface that accept user data (such as asset descriptions, notes, or custom attributes) for any unexpected script tags or JavaScript contentAffected if User input fields in the Web UI do not properly sanitize or encode special characters, allowing script tags to be stored and rendered
-
Check browser execution of stored scriptsUsing a test account, attempt to inject a benign script (such as <script>alert('test')</script>) into a Web UI field and verify whether it executes when other users view that dataAffected if Injected JavaScript executes in the browser when viewing the affected interface, indicating the XSS vulnerability is present
You are affected if you are running Maximo Asset Management versions 7.1, 7.1.1, 7.5, or 7.6 and the Web UI allows unsanitized user input to be stored and rendered to other users without encoding.
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 IBM-supplied patches for this XSS vulnerability; in the interim, implement strict input validation and output encoding on all user-supplied data rendered in the Web UI to prevent script execution.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation16.0 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 $9,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-1208 — 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-2017-1208 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