CVE-2017-12309
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 the Cisco Email Security Appliance (ESA) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct a HTTP response splitting attack. The vulnerability is due to the failure of the application or its environment to properly sanitize input values. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by injecting malicious HTTP headers, controlling the response body, or splitting the response into multiple responses. An exploit could allow the attacker to perform cross-site scripting attacks, cross-user defacement, web cache poisoning, and similar exploits. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvf16705.
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 confidenceThe Cisco Email Security Appliance (ESA) contains an HTTP response splitting vulnerability where the application fails to properly sanitize input values. An unauthenticated remote attacker can inject malicious HTTP headers by controlling input, allowing them to split HTTP responses and potentially perform cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks, cross-user defacement, web cache poisoning, and similar exploits.
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= 10.0.2-020= 11.0.0-105CVSS 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
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.
-
Verify ESA web interface is accessibleConfirm the Cisco ESA web interface (HTTPS/HTTP) is reachable from network locations. This can be done by attempting to access the device's management IP on ports 80/443 or checking firewall rules that allow HTTP/HTTPS traffic to the ESA.Affected if The ESA web interface is exposed to untrusted networks (including the internet) without proper network segmentation or authentication barriers.
-
Identify the installed ESA firmware versionLog into the ESA CLI and run the command 'version' or 'show version' to display the current firmware version. Alternatively, access the web interface and navigate to System Administration > Configuration Summary to view the version information.Affected if The installed version matches exactly 10.0.2-020 or 11.0.0-105, or falls within a release train that includes these specific vulnerable versions.
-
Confirm ESA is processing HTTP trafficCheck if the ESA is configured to accept HTTP connections. In the web interface, go to Network > HTTP Settings or use the CLI command 'httpconfig' to review HTTP listener settings. Verify if HTTP services are enabled.Affected if HTTP (port 80) or HTTPS (port 443) services are enabled and the ESA is actively accepting HTTP connections from users or external systems.
-
Review HTTP response headers for injectionSend a crafted HTTP request with carriage return and line feed characters (for example, in a parameter value) to the ESA web interface and observe the response headers. Use a tool like curl or Burp Suite to capture and inspect the full HTTP response.Affected if The HTTP response contains multiple response codes (evidenced by multiple Set-Cookie, Location, or other header lines) or displays arbitrary user-supplied content in the response headers.
The environment is affected if the ESA firmware version matches 10.0.2-020 or 11.0.0-105 (or is in the same release train) and the web interface HTTP service 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 Cisco patch for bug CSCvf16705, which is the vendor-supplied fix for this vulnerability. As a critical email security device, the ESA should be updated during a planned maintenance window with thorough testing of email flow and web interface functionality.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-12309 — 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-2017-12309 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