CVE-2017-15084
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 · uneditedThe web UI in Rapid7 Metasploit before 4.14.1-20170828 allows logout CSRF, aka R7-2017-22.
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 Metasploit Framework web UI before version 4.14.1-20170828 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the logout functionality. An attacker could craft a malicious page that, when visited by an authenticated user, would silently force that user's session to terminate via the logout endpoint without their consent or knowledge.
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<= 4.14.1CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Determine installed Metasploit Framework versionLaunch msfconsole and run the 'version' command, or check the installed package version via system package managerAffected if version is 4.14.1 or lower (any version up to and including 4.14.1)
-
Verify web UI is enabled and accessibleConfirm the Metasploit web interface (Web UI or Express) is configured and running - typically accessible via browser on configured portAffected if web UI is enabled and accessible to network users
-
Inspect logout endpoint for CSRF protectionExamine the logout action code in the Metasploit web UI source - check if verify_authenticity_token is present in the logout controller action, or inspect POST /logout requests for csrf token in headersAffected if logout action lacks anti-CSRF token validation (no verify_authenticity_token or token not required for POST requests)
-
Test logout endpoint behaviorSend a POST request to /logout without an X-CSRF-Token header or authenticity_token parameter - observe if logout succeeds without tokenAffected if logout completes successfully without requiring valid CSRF token
You are affected if your Metasploit Framework version is 4.14.1 or lower AND the web UI is enabled, and the logout endpoint does not enforce CSRF token validation.
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 anti-CSRF token validation on the logout action (require valid token for POST requests to /logout), consistent with the application's existing authentication security model. This is a standard web security fix using Rails built-in csrf_meta_tags and verify_authenticity_token.
- Consultation3.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-15084 — 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-2017-15084 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