CVE-2017-3898
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 · uneditedA man-in-the-middle attack vulnerability in the non-certificate-based authentication mechanism in McAfee LiveSafe (MLS) versions prior to 16.0.3 allows network attackers to modify the Windows registry value associated with the McAfee update via the HTTP backend-response.
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 confidenceMcAfee LiveSafe versions prior to 16.0.3 contain a man-in-the-middle vulnerability in their non-certificate-based authentication mechanism for update communications. Network attackers intercepting HTTP traffic between the client and McAfee's update servers can modify the Windows registry value controlling the update URL, potentially redirecting clients to malicious update sources.
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<= 16.0.2CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.
-
Verify McAfee LiveSafe installationCheck for McAfee LiveSafe in the list of installed programs via Control Panel > Programs and Features, or query the Windows Registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall for a DisplayName containing 'McAfee LiveSafe'Affected if McAfee LiveSafe is present on the system
-
Determine installed versionOpen Programs and Features, locate McAfee LiveSafe, and note the version number displayed, or query the registry Uninstall key for the DisplayVersion valueAffected if Version displayed is 16.0.2 or lower
-
Confirm vulnerable version rangeCompare your installed version number against the known vulnerable range: any version up to and including 16.0.2Affected if Installed version is 16.0.2 or earlier (versions prior to 16.0.3)
-
Inspect update URL registry configurationExamine the Windows registry for the update server URL configuration key (the vulnerability allows attackers to modify this value to redirect updates to malicious sources). Use regedit or reg query to locate registry keys related to McAfee update URLs under HKLM\SOFTWARE\McAfee or HKCU\SOFTWARE\McAfeeAffected if The update URL registry value points to an untrusted or unexpected server, or if the update mechanism uses HTTP instead of HTTPS (non-certificate-based authentication)
A system is affected if McAfee LiveSafe version 16.0.2 or earlier is installed and uses non-certificate-based HTTP update communications that can be redirected via registry modification.
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 dataUpgrade McAfee LiveSafe to version 16.0.3 or later, which implements certificate-based authentication for update mechanism communications.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-3898 — 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-2017-3898 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