CVE-2017-14005
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 Unverified Password Change issue was discovered in ProMinent MultiFLEX M10a Controller web interface. When setting a new password for a user, the application does not require the user to know the original password. An attacker who is authenticated could change a user's password, enabling future access and possible configuration changes.
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 ProMinent MultiFLEX M10a Controller web interface contains an Insecure Password Change vulnerability where the password change function does not verify the user's current password before accepting a new one. An authenticated attacker can change any user's password without knowing the original, effectively enabling full account takeover and subsequent unauthorized configuration changes.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Confirm device model and web interface accessAccess the web interface login page and verify the device is a ProMinent MultiFLEX M10a Controller. Check the system information or about page to identify the exact model.Affected if The device is a ProMinent MultiFLEX M10a Controller with an accessible web interface
-
Identify firmware versionNavigate to the web interface admin or system settings section to view the installed firmware version information.Affected if Any firmware version is installed, as all versions are affected according to the advisory
-
Verify user authentication is configuredLog into the web interface with valid credentials to confirm user authentication is enabled and functional.Affected if Web interface requires authentication and user accounts are configured
-
Test password change without current password verificationUsing an authenticated session in the web interface, access the password change function for another user account. Submit a new password without entering the current password for that account, and observe if the change is accepted.Affected if The password change is successful without requiring the account owner's current password as verification
The environment is affected if you are running a ProMinent MultiFLEX M10a Controller with the web interface enabled and the password change function accepts a new password without verifying the user's current password.
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 dataImplement proper authentication verification requiring the current password before allowing any password change. Additionally, enforce strong password policies and consider implementing audit logging for password modifications.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-14005 — 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-2017-14005 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