dbcve.org
Security Key Lifecycle ManagerApplication · Ibm

CVE-2017-1668

MEDIUM · 6.1 CVSS v3.0 Published 2018-01-09
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges

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 · unedited
IBM Tivoli Key Lifecycle Manager 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7 could allow a remote attacker to conduct phishing attacks, using an open redirect attack. By persuading a victim to visit a specially-crafted Web site, a remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability to spoof the URL displayed to redirect a user to a malicious Web site that would appear to be trusted. This could allow the attacker to obtain highly sensitive information or conduct further attacks against the victim. IBM X-Force ID: 133562.

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 confidence

IBM Tivoli Key Lifecycle Manager versions 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7 contain an open redirect vulnerability where the application fails to properly validate redirect URLs. An attacker can craft malicious URLs that appear to originate from the trusted TKLM site but redirect users to arbitrary external websites, facilitating phishing attacks and credential theft.

MitigationImplement strict URL validation for all redirect parameters using a whitelist approach. Ensure all redirects either use relative paths or validate against an explicit allowlist of permitted domains before performing the redirect.

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
Security Key Lifecycle ManagerApplication
Affected:= 2.5.0= 2.5.0.1= 2.5.0.2= 2.5.0.3= 2.5.0.4= 2.5.0.5= 2.5.0.6= 2.5.0.7= 2.5.0.8= 2.6.0= 2.6.0.1= 2.6.0.2

CVSS 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
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed IBM Security Key Lifecycle Manager version
    Check the product version through the administration console, installation directory, or by querying the version file typically found in the installation path (e.g., /opt/ibm/tklm or the Windows equivalent). On Linux, you can also check via rpm query or similar package management tool if installed via package.
    Affected if The installed version matches any of these: 2.5.0, 2.5.0.1, 2.5.0.2, 2.5.0.3, 2.5.0.4, 2.5.0.5, 2.5.0.6, 2.5.0.7, 2.5.0.8, 2.6.0, 2.6.0.1, or 2.6.0.2.
  2. Locate redirect endpoints in the application
    Review web application traffic and identify any URL parameters that handle redirection, such as 'redirect', 'url', 'next', 'target', or 'dest' parameters. Examine HTTP response headers (particularly Location header) and HTML meta refresh tags for dynamic redirect behavior.
    Affected if The application contains redirect functionality that accepts user-controlled URL parameters without strict validation.
  3. Test for open redirect vulnerability
    Craft a test URL using the identified redirect parameter with an external domain (e.g., https://your-target.com) as the parameter value, then observe if the application redirects to the external site instead of rejecting or normalizing the request.
    Affected if The application redirects to an arbitrary external domain specified in the redirect parameter rather than rejecting the request or restricting to internal paths only.
  4. Review server logs for suspicious redirect patterns
    Examine web server access logs and application logs for redirect parameters with non-relative URLs pointing to external domains. Look for patterns where the referrer or user-agent indicates redirection to unknown external sites.
    Affected if Logs show redirect parameters containing arbitrary external URLs that were processed by the application.

A user is affected if IBM Security Key Lifecycle Manager version 2.5.0 through 2.6.0.2 is installed and the application accepts redirect parameters that allow arbitrary external URLs without validation.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement strict URL validation for all redirect parameters using a whitelist approach. Ensure all redirects either use relative paths or validate against an explicit allowlist of permitted domains before performing the redirect.

Fix this in Security Key Lifecycle Manager Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-1668 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2017-1668 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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