CVE-2017-12726
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 Use of Hard-coded Password issue was discovered in Smiths Medical Medfusion 4000 Wireless Syringe Infusion Pump, Version 1.1, 1.5, and 1.6. Telnet on the pump uses hardcoded credentials, which can be used if the pump is configured to allow external communications. Smiths Medical assesses that it is not possible to upload files via Telnet and the impact of this vulnerability is limited to the communications module.
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 Medfusion 4000 Wireless Syringe Infusion Pump versions 1.1, 1.5, and 1.6 contain hardcoded credentials for the built-in Telnet service. An attacker with network access to the pump can authenticate using these hardcoded credentials to access the communications module, potentially intercepting or manipulating infusion pump communications.
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= 1.1= 1.5= 1.6CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 modelLocate the infusion pump and check the physical label or device display for the model name. Confirm it is a Smiths Medical Medfusion 4000 Wireless Syringe Infusion Pump.Affected if The device is a Medfusion 4000 pump
-
Check the installed firmware versionAccess the pump's system information menu or check the device label/packaging for the firmware version number. Compare it to the affected versions: 1.1, 1.5, and 1.6.Affected if The firmware version is 1.1, 1.5, or 1.6
-
Determine if Telnet service is enabledCheck the pump's network or communications settings menu for Telnet service status. If accessible via the administrative interface, look for Telnet or remote access configuration options.Affected if Telnet service is enabled on the pump
-
Verify network accessibility of the Telnet portAttempt a TCP connection to port 23 on the pump's IP address from an external system, or review network firewall rules to determine if inbound connections to port 23 are permitted toward the pump.Affected if Port 23 (Telnet) is reachable from a network where an attacker could reside
The environment is affected if you have a Medfusion 4000 pump running firmware version 1.1, 1.5, or 1.6 with Telnet enabled and network-accessible on port 23.
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 dataRestrict network access to the infusion pump using network segmentation and firewalls; disable Telnet if external communications are not required; contact Smiths Medical for firmware updates that address the hardcoded credentials.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-12726 — 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-2017-12726 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