CVE-2017-12820
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 · uneditedArbitrary memory read from controlled memory pointer in Gemalto's HASP SRM, Sentinel HASP and Sentinel LDK products prior to Sentinel LDK RTE version 7.55 leads to remote denial of service.
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 confidenceThis vulnerability in Gemalto's HASP SRM, Sentinel HASP and Sentinel LDK products allows an attacker to read arbitrary memory locations via a controlled memory pointer. The lack of proper validation on the pointer enables remote attackers to cause a denial of service by triggering the uncontrolled memory read, and potentially disclose sensitive information from process memory.
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<= 7.50CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 Sentinel LDK installationCheck for installed Sentinel LDK RTE software on the system. On Windows, look in Add/Remove Programs or check for the 'Sentinel LDK' entry in the program files directory. On Linux, check for installed packages related to 'haspd' or 'sentinel'.Affected if Sentinel LDK RTE software is installed on the system
-
Determine the firmware versionUse the Sentinel Adminusr or haspuid utility (typically found in the Sentinel LDK installation directory) to query the connected hardware dongle for its firmware version. Run 'haspdinst -i' or check the vendor/dongle information through the Sentinel LDK management tools.Affected if The firmware version returned is 7.50 or earlier
-
Verify the RTE service is runningCheck if the Sentinel LDK runtime environment service is active. On Windows, check the 'Sentinel LDK' or 'hasp' service status in Services. On Linux, check for running haspd processes using 'ps aux | grep hasp' or 'systemctl status haspd'.Affected if The Sentinel LDK RTE service is running and the firmware version is 7.50 or earlier
A system is affected if it has Sentinel LDK RTE firmware version 7.50 or earlier installed and the runtime environment is active.
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 Sentinel LDK RTE version 7.55 or later to address this vulnerability. If immediate patching is not feasible, restrict network access to affected services and monitor for anomalous memory access patterns.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-12820 — 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-2017-12820 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