CVE-2017-15527
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 · uneditedPrior to ITMS 8.1 RU4, the Symantec Management Console can be susceptible to a directory traversal exploit, which is a type of attack that can occur when there is insufficient security validation / sanitization of user-supplied input file names, such that characters representing "traverse to parent directory" are passed through to the file APIs.
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 confidenceDirectory traversal vulnerability in Symantec Management Console (ITMS versions prior to 8.1 RU4). Insufficient validation of user-supplied input allows attackers to use '..' sequences to access files outside the intended web root directory.
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< 8.1CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/PR:H/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 Symantec Management Console is installedLook for 'Symantec' or 'ITMS' in installed programs on the server, or check if port 80/443 is listening with the Symantec management console web interfaceAffected if Symantec Management Console is not found on the system
-
Identify the ITMS versionAccess the Symantec Management Console login page and check the version information typically displayed on the login page or in the About/Help section, or run 'altiris' or 'symantec' version commands if available on the serverAffected if Unable to determine the installed version from console or system
-
Compare installed version against affected rangeCheck if the version is displayed as anything prior to 8.1 RU4. The affected range is any version lower than 8.1 RU4.Affected if Installed version is < 8.1 RU4 (for example, 8.0, 7.6, 6.x, etc.)
-
Verify console is network accessibleConfirm the management console web interface is reachable over the network (default ports 80/443 or custom configured ports)Affected if Console is exposed to network and version is vulnerable
If the installed ITMS/Symantec Management Console version is any release prior to 8.1 RU4 and the console is accessible, the environment is affected by this directory traversal vulnerability.
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 data8.1
Apply the vendor patch by upgrading to ITMS 8.1 RU4 or later, which includes proper input sanitization to prevent directory traversal attacks.
- 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-2017-15527 — 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-2017-15527 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