CVE-2017-14003
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 · uneditedAn Authentication Bypass by Spoofing issue was discovered in LAVA Ether-Serial Link (ESL) running firmware versions 6.01.00/29.03.2007 and prior versions. An improper authentication vulnerability has been identified, which, if exploited, would allow an attacker with the same IP address to bypass authentication by accessing a specific uniform resource locator.
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 confidenceThe vulnerability allows an attacker with the same IP address as a legitimate user to bypass authentication by accessing a specific URL in LAVA Ether-Serial Link (ESL) firmware versions 6.01.00/29.03.2007 and prior. This represents a serious authentication bypass by spoofing, likely due to improper validation of IP-based session identity or URL-driven authentication state manipulation.
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<= 6.01.00\/29.03.2007CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 if LAVA Ether-Serial Link device is presentLocate and inventory network devices; identify any LAVA ESL hardware or the web service on port 80/443 typically used for ESL managementAffected if A LAVA ESL device or its management web interface is found on the network
-
Determine the firmware versionAccess the device web interface or check the firmware file; look for version information displayed in the admin panel, system info page, or boot logs showing version <= 6.01.00 or date <= 29.03.2007Affected if Firmware version is 6.01.00/29.03.2007 or earlier
-
Verify the web authentication interface is exposedConfirm the ESL web management interface is accessible over HTTP/HTTPS on the device; note the authentication login page URL structureAffected if The ESL web interface with login functionality is reachable
-
Test for the vulnerable URL bypassIf authenticated session exists, attempt to access specific internal URLs without re-authentication; compare behavior when accessing from the same IP versus a different IP addressAffected if Accessing the device from an IP address previously used by an authenticated user allows unauthenticated access to privileged functions
A user is affected if they have a LAVA ESL device running firmware version 6.01.00/29.03.2007 or earlier with its web interface exposed on the network.
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 dataIf vendor firmware is available, upgrade immediately; otherwise implement network segmentation to isolate the device and consider IP-based access controls as compensating measures while monitoring for unauthorized access attempts.
- 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-2017-14003 — 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-2017-14003 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