CVE-2017-14025
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 Improper Input Validation issue was discovered in ABB FOX515T release 1.0. An improper input validation vulnerability has been identified, allowing a local attacker to provide a malicious parameter to the script that is not validated by the application, This could enable the attacker to retrieve any file on the server.
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 ABB FOX515T release 1.0 contains an improper input validation vulnerability where a script does not validate a parameter provided by a local attacker. This allows the attacker to manipulate the parameter to retrieve arbitrary files from the server, indicating a local file inclusion or path traversal flaw.
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= 1.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 the device modelAccess the device admin interface or check system information to confirm the device is an ABB FOX515T (or Hitachienergy Fox515t) unitAffected if The device model is not ABB FOX515T or Fox515t - the vulnerability only affects this specific device
-
Check the installed firmware versionNavigate to the device firmware/software information section in the admin interface, or use the command line interface to query the firmware version (often via 'show version' or similar)Affected if The firmware version is exactly 1.0 - only this version is listed as affected in the CVE
-
Locate the vulnerable scriptReview the web application's script directory structure or enumerate available CGI/scripts on the device. The CVE indicates a script does not validate a parameter - identify which script handles file requests or includes external filesAffected if The vulnerable script exists and is accessible - the flaw is in a specific script that handles file parameters without validation
-
Test for path traversal vulnerabilityIf you identify a script that accepts file parameters, attempt to manipulate the parameter with path traversal sequences such as '../' or absolute paths (e.g., parameter=../../etc/passwd) to access files outside the intended directoryAffected if The parameter allows traversal sequences to access arbitrary files - successful retrieval of system files indicates the vulnerability is present and exploitable
You are affected if you have an ABB FOX515T device running firmware version 1.0 with the vulnerable script that fails to validate path parameters, allowing path traversal attacks.
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 strict input validation on all script parameters, using allowlist validation and proper sanitization to prevent path traversal. Restrict file access to intended directories and validate that requested file paths fall within allowed boundaries.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-14025 — 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-2017-14025 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