Usg2205bsr FirmwareOperating system · Huawei

CVE-2017-17311

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.0 Published 2018-08-21
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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
Some Huawei Firewall products USG2205BSR V300R001C10SPC600; USG2220BSR V300R001C00; USG5120BSR V300R001C00; USG5150BSR V300R001C00 have a DoS vulnerability in the IPSEC IKEv1 implementations of Huawei Firewall products. Due to improper handling of the malformed messages, an attacker may sent crafted packets to the affected device to exploit these vulnerabilities. Successful exploit the vulnerability could lead to device deny of service.

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

A denial of service vulnerability exists in the IPSEC IKEv1 implementation of specific Huawei USG firewall products (USG2205BSR, USG2220BSR, USG5120BSR, USG5150BSR). The vulnerability stems from improper handling of malformed IKEv1 packets, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to send specially crafted packets that cause the device to crash or become unresponsive.

MitigationApply Huawei firmware patches when available; in the interim, consider restricting IKEv1 traffic at network perimeter or disabling IKEv1 if IKEv2 is supported.

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
Usg2205bsr FirmwareOperating system
Affected:= v300r001c10spc600
Usg2220bsr FirmwareOperating system
Affected:= v300r001c00
Usg5120bsr FirmwareOperating system
Affected:= v300r001c00
Usg5150bsr FirmwareOperating system
Affected:= v300r001c00

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
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

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

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

  1. Identify the USG firewall model
    Run 'display device' or check the physical device label to confirm the model is USG2205BSR, USG2220BSR, USG5120BSR, or USG5150BSR
    Affected if The model matches one of these four affected models
  2. Check the firmware version
    Run 'display version' to obtain the current firmware version number
    Affected if The version is v300r001c10spc600 (for USG2205BSR) or v300r001c00 (for USG2220BSR, USG5120BSR, or USG5150BSR)
  3. Verify IPSEC IKEv1 is configured
    Run 'display ipsec sa' and 'display ike peer' to check if any IPSEC SAs or IKE peers are defined. Also run 'display ipsec proposal' to list IPsec proposals
    Affected if Any IKE peers or IPSEC security associations are configured, indicating IKEv1 is in use
  4. Confirm IKEv1 is enabled on the device
    Check the IPSEC policy or VPN configuration via 'display ipsec policy' and look for references to IKEv1 or ensure the IKE service is running
    Affected if IKEv1 is enabled in the IPSEC VPN settings or the IKE service is active

The device is affected if it is a USG2205BSR, USG2220BSR, USG5120BSR, or USG5150BSR running the specific vulnerable firmware version and has IPSEC IKEv1 configured or enabled.

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

Apply Huawei firmware patches when available; in the interim, consider restricting IKEv1 traffic at network perimeter or disabling IKEv1 if IKEv2 is supported.

Fix this in Usg2205bsr Firmware Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
20.0 hours of engineering $3,500
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-17311 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2017-17311 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