CVE-2017-1280
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 Rational Quality Manager and IBM Rational Collaborative Lifecycle Management 5.0 through 5.0.2 and 6.0 through 6.0.5 are 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: 124758.
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 confidenceStored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in IBM Rational Quality Manager and IBM Rational Collaborative Lifecycle Management versions 5.0-5.0.2 and 6.0-6.0.5 allows authenticated users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code into the web interface, potentially enabling session hijacking and credential theft through a trusted session.
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= 5.0.0= 5.0.1= 5.0.2= 6.0.0= 6.0.1= 6.0.2= 6.0.3= 6.0.4= 6.0.5= 5.0.0= 5.0.1= 5.0.2= 6.0.0= 6.0.1= 6.0.2= 6.0.3= 6.0.4= 6.0.5CVSS 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
- 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 installed IBM Rational product versionAccess the IBM Rational Quality Manager or CLM administration console and locate the version information, typically found in the About or System Information section of the web interfaceAffected if The installed version is 5.0.0, 5.0.1, 5.0.2, 6.0.0, 6.0.1, 6.0.2, 6.0.3, 6.0.4, or 6.0.5
-
Verify authentication mechanism is enabledConfirm that user authentication is active for the IBM Rational web interface and that user accounts exist with the ability to create or modify contentAffected if User authentication is enabled and users can submit or edit content within the application
-
Inspect web interface for unsanitized input fieldsReview user-submitted fields in the web interface such as text inputs, comments, descriptions, or attachment metadata for potential script injection pointsAffected if User-supplied data is rendered in the web interface without proper output encoding, allowing stored JavaScript to execute
Your environment is affected if you are running any IBM Rational Quality Manager or CLM version between 5.0.0 and 6.0.5 inclusive and users can submit content that gets stored and displayed to other 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 dataUpgrade to IBM Rational Quality Manager and CLM versions beyond 6.0.5 (or apply IBM's subsequent fix packs). Implement output encoding and input validation for all user-supplied data in web interfaces as a defense-in-depth measure.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-1280 — 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-2017-1280 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