CVE-2017-1262
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 Security Guardium 10.0 is vulnerable to HTTP response splitting attacks. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability using specially-crafted URL to cause the server to return a split response, once the URL is clicked. This would allow the attacker to perform further attacks, such as Web cache poisoning, cross-site scripting, and possibly obtain sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 124737.
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 Security Guardium 10.0 is vulnerable to HTTP response splitting. A remote attacker can exploit this by using specially-crafted URLs to inject arbitrary headers or split HTTP responses. This enables secondary attacks including web cache poisoning, cross-site scripting (XSS), and potential sensitive information disclosure.
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= 10.0.1= 10.1.0= 10.1.2= 10.1.3CVSS 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.
-
Determine installed Guardium versionAccess the Guardium CLI or admin console and run the command to display the product version, typically via 'version' command or through the web UI system information pageAffected if The installed version matches exactly 10.0, 10.0.1, 10.1.0, 10.1.2, or 10.1.3
-
Verify Guardium web interface is enabledCheck the Guardium configuration for web UI status, typically through the admin console under Server Setup or via CLI command that shows enabled servicesAffected if The web interface (HTTP/HTTPS service) is enabled and running on the Guardium appliance
-
Confirm network accessibility of web UITest connectivity to the Guardium web interface port (typically 8443 for HTTPS or 8080 for HTTP) from external networks using telnet or curl to verify the service is exposedAffected if The web interface is accessible from network segments beyond localhost or trusted admin networks
-
Check for recent security patches appliedReview the Guardium patch history through the admin console under Maintenance > Patch Management or via CLI command listing installed patchesAffected if No patches addressing CVE-2017-1262 have been applied and the version remains in the affected list
The environment is affected if Guardium version is exactly 10.0, 10.0.1, 10.1.0, 10.1.2, or 10.1.3 AND the web interface is enabled and accessible, with no CVE-2017-1262 patch installed.
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 for CVE-2017-1262 to IBM Security Guardium 10.0. As an interim control, sanitize and validate URL inputs, and implement Web Application Firewall (WAF) rules to detect and block response splitting attempts.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-1262 — 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-2017-1262 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