Spa300 FirmwareOperating system · Cisco
CVE-2017-12271
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 · uneditedA vulnerability in Cisco SPA300 and SPA500 Series IP Phones could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to execute unwanted actions on an affected device. The vulnerability is due to a lack of cross-site request forgery (CSRF) protection. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by tricking the user of a web application into executing an adverse action. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCuz88421, CSCuz91356, CSCve56308.
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 confidenceA cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Cisco SPA300 and SPA500 Series IP Phones allows unauthenticated remote attackers to execute unwanted actions on affected devices by tricking users into performing adverse actions through malicious requests.
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
Spa300 FirmwareOperating system
<= 7.5.5
Spa500 FirmwareOperating system
<= 7.5.5CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 the device modelAccess the phone's web interface or check the physical device label to confirm it is a Cisco SPA300 or SPA500 Series IP PhoneAffected if The device is not a Cisco SPA300 or SPA500 series phone - this CVE does not apply to other models
-
Check the firmware versionLog into the phone's web interface and navigate to the Administration > Firmware Upgrade page, or check the version displayed on the device status screenAffected if The installed firmware version is 7.5.5 or lower; versions higher than 7.5.5 are not affected
-
Verify web interface accessibilityConfirm the phone's web management interface is reachable over HTTP/HTTPS from the networkAffected if The web interface is exposed to untrusted networks - this is required for the CSRF vulnerability to be exploitable
You are affected if you have a Cisco SPA300 or SPA500 series phone running firmware version 7.5.5 or lower with the web interface accessible to network users.
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 Cisco firmware updates for the SPA300/SPA500 series phones to add CSRF token validation to the web interface, or implement network segmentation to limit exposure to untrusted networks.
Fix this in Spa300 Firmware
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $7,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-12271 — 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-2017-12271 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