CVE-2017-17305
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 · uneditedSome Huawei Firewall products USG2205BSR V300R001C10SPC600; USG2220BSR V300R001C00; USG5120BSR V300R001C00; USG5150BSR V300R001C00 have a Bleichenbacher Oracle vulnerability in the IPSEC IKEv1 implementations. Remote attackers can decrypt IPSEC tunnel ciphertext data by leveraging a Bleichenbacher RSA padding oracle. Cause a Bleichenbacher oracle attack. Successful exploit this vulnerability can impact IPSec tunnel security.
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 vulnerability is a Bleichenbacher oracle in the IPSEC IKEv1 RSA key exchange implementation on Huawei USG firewall appliances. The implementation leaks timing or error information that allows an attacker to distinguish between correctly and incorrectly padded RSA ciphertexts, enabling iterative decryption of IPSec tunnel key material.
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= v300r001c10spc600= v300r001c00= v300r001c00= v300r001c00CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/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 USG firewall modelLog into the firewall CLI or web interface and run 'display device' or check the system info page to confirm the exact model number (Usg2205bsr, Usg2220bsr, Usg5120bsr, or Usg5150bsr)Affected if Model is one of the four listed variants (Usg2205bsr, Usg2220bsr, Usg5120bsr, Usg5150bsr)
-
Check the installed firmware versionRun 'display version' in the firewall CLI or check the firmware version in the web interface under System > Device Management > Device InformationAffected if Firmware version matches the affected versions: v300r001c10spc600 for Usg2205bsr, or v300r001c00 for Usg2220bsr/Usg5120bsr/Usg5150bsr
-
Determine if IPSec VPN with IKEv1 is configuredRun 'display ike sa' and 'display ipsec sa' in the CLI to list active IPSec security associations, then run 'display ike proposal' to check IKEv1 proposalsAffected if Any IPSec tunnel is active using IKEv1 (Phase 1) with RSA authentication
-
Verify RSA key exchange is in use for IKEv1Run 'display ike peer' or check the IPSec policy configuration to see if authentication method is set to 'rsa-sig' or 'RSA'Affected if IKEv1 peer configuration uses RSA signature authentication (not pre-shared key)
The environment is affected if the USG model and firmware version match the affected combinations AND IPSec VPNs using IKEv1 with RSA authentication are configured.
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 dataApply Huawei firmware updates that address this vulnerability. As a workaround, disable IKEv1 and use IKEv2 if supported, or implement additional network-level controls to restrict access to the IPSec endpoints.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-17305 — 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-2017-17305 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