CVE-2017-18285
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 · uneditedThe Gentoo app-backup/burp package before 2.1.32 has incorrect group ownership of the /etc/burp directory, which might allow local users to obtain read and write access to arbitrary files by leveraging access to a certain account for a burp-server.conf change.
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 Gentoo app-backup/burp package versions prior to 2.1.32 have incorrect group ownership set on the /etc/burp configuration directory. This misconfiguration allows local users with access to a specific account to modify burp-server.conf and potentially gain read/write access to arbitrary files on the system.
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< 2.1.32CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 if burp is installed and get its versionRun 'burp --version' or check your package manager (e.g., 'emerge -a app-backup/burp' on Gentoo, or 'dpkg -l | grep burp' on Debian-based systems)Affected if The installed version is lower than 2.1.32
-
Verify the group ownership of the /etc/burp configuration directoryRun 'ls -ld /etc/burp' and examine the group column (the third field)Affected if The group is set to an unprivileged or unexpected group (not 'root' or 'burp' or the intended restrictive group)
-
Check the permissions on /etc/burpRun 'ls -ld /etc/burp' and examine the permission bits (the first field)Affected if Permissions are overly permissive (e.g., world-readable or world-writable, or group-writable to a broad group)
-
Determine if burp-server.conf exists and is writable by unauthorized usersRun 'ls -l /etc/burp/burp-server.conf' and verify write permissions for the relevant group or other usersAffected if The configuration file is writable by a group that includes untrusted local users
You are affected if the burp version is below 2.1.32 AND the /etc/burp directory has incorrect group ownership or overly permissive settings that allow untrusted local users to modify burp-server.conf.
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 data2.1.32
Update the burp package to version 2.1.32 or later, and correct the group ownership of /etc/burp to the appropriate restricted group (typically 'burp' or 'root') with restrictive permissions (e.g., 750 or 770).
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-18285 — 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-2017-18285 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