CVE-2017-17745
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 · uneditedCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in system_name_set.cgi in TP-Link TL-SG108E 1.0.0 allows authenticated remote attackers to submit arbitrary java script via the 'sysName' parameter.
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 confidenceStored XSS vulnerability in TP-Link TL-SG108E switch web interface. The system_name_set.cgi script does not sanitize the sysName parameter, allowing authenticated attackers to inject persistent JavaScript that executes when other users view the system name in the management interface.
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= 1.0.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the device modelAccess the switch web interface or check the physical device label to confirm it is a TP-Link TL-SG108E switchAffected if The device is not a TP-Link TL-SG108E switch, then it is not affected by this specific CVE
-
Check the firmware versionLog into the web interface and navigate to the System or Status section to view the firmware version, or use the web interface diagnostic tools to retrieve the version informationAffected if The firmware version is NOT exactly 1.0.0, then it is not affected by this vulnerability
-
Verify web management interface is enabledCheck if the HTTP/HTTPS web interface is enabled on the switch through the management console or network configurationAffected if The web interface is disabled and there is no authenticated access to submit the sysName parameter, the vulnerability cannot be exploited
-
Inspect the current system nameView the System Name configuration in the switch web interface under System > System Name or equivalent menu, and examine the current sysName value for any unexpected characters, tags, or script elementsAffected if The system name contains HTML script tags, JavaScript event handlers, or encoded malicious payloads indicating the device has been compromised or is vulnerable to stored XSS
You are affected if you have a TP-Link TL-SG108E switch running firmware version 1.0.0 with the web management interface enabled and the sysName parameter is either vulnerable to injection or already contains malicious script content.
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 input validation and output encoding for the sysName parameter in system_name_set.cgi. Restrict access to the management interface to trusted users only until vendor patch is available.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-17745 — 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-2017-17745 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