CVE-2017-14049
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 · uneditedIn BlackCat CMS 1.2, backend/settings/ajax_save_settings.php allows remote authenticated users to conduct XSS attacks via the Website header or Website footer field.
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 confidenceIn BlackCat CMS 1.2, the backend/settings/ajax_save_settings.php file fails to properly sanitize the Website header and Website footer fields, allowing authenticated users to inject malicious JavaScript code. This stored XSS payload executes whenever other users view pages displaying these settings.
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= 1.2CVSS 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.
-
Confirm BlackCat CMS versionLocate the version file or header in your BlackCat CMS installation (typically in a version.php, config.php, or admin footer). Compare the installed version to 1.2.Affected if The installed version is exactly 1.2 or falls within the affected range (= 1.2).
-
Verify backend access to settingsConfirm you have administrative access to the BlackCat CMS backend. Navigate to the settings area where Website header and Website footer fields are configurable, typically under Backend Settings or similar.Affected if You have authenticated access to the backend settings interface.
-
Inspect stored header/footer configurationAccess the database or configuration file where the Website header and Website footer settings are stored. Look for any HTML, script tags, or JavaScript event handlers in these fields.Affected if The stored Website header or Website footer value contains unescaped HTML tags, script elements, or JavaScript event handlers (onclick, onerror, etc.).
-
Verify output rendering contextView any frontend page that displays the Website header or footer content. Inspect the page source to determine if the content is being rendered without proper encoding.Affected if The header/footer content renders as raw HTML/JavaScript in the page source rather than being entity-encoded.
You are affected if you run BlackCat CMS version 1.2 and the stored Website header or footer configuration contains malicious JavaScript that executes when viewed by 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 dataImplement input validation and output encoding for the header and footer fields. Use a whitelist approach for allowed HTML tags if rich content is required, or strip all HTML/script tags if plain text is sufficient.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-14049 — 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-2017-14049 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