CVE-2017-3969
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 · uneditedAbuse of communication channels vulnerability in the server in McAfee Network Security Management (NSM) before 8.2.7.42.2 allows man-in-the-middle attackers to decrypt messages via an inadequate implementation of SSL.
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 Network Security Management (NSM) servers before version 8.2.7.42.2 contain an inadequate SSL implementation that allows man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept and decrypt encrypted communications. The vulnerability stems from improper handling of SSL/TLS protocols in the server component, enabling attackers positioned on the network path to compromise the confidentiality of transmitted data.
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< 8.2.7.42.2CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Verify McAfee NSM is installedLocate the McAfee Network Security Manager installation directory, typically found under C:\Program Files\McAfee\Network Security Manager or /opt/mcafee/nsm, or check the Windows Services list for 'McAfee Network Security Manager' service.Affected if The product is present on the system.
-
Determine the installed versionAccess the NSM web console and navigate to Help > About, or check the version.txt file in the installation directory, or run 'nsm -version' from the command line if available.Affected if A version number is returned from the product.
-
Compare version against affected rangeCompare your installed version to the affected range: any version below 8.2.7.42.2 is vulnerable. For example, 8.2.7.30.0 or 8.1.x would be affected.Affected if The installed version is less than 8.2.7.42.2.
-
Check SSL/TLS configuration exposureVerify that the NSM server is accessible over network and handling SSL/TLS connections. Examine the server's SSL configuration through the NSM web interface under Administration > Servers > SSL Settings, or by reviewing the server.xml or ssl.conf configuration files in the installation directory.Affected if The server is accessible over network and uses SSL/TLS for client connections.
You are affected if McAfee Network Security Manager is installed with a version lower than 8.2.7.42.2 and the server handles SSL/TLS connections over the network.
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 data8.2.7.42.2
Upgrade McAfee NSM to version 8.2.7.42.2 or later which contains the corrected SSL implementation. Alternatively, if upgrade is not immediately feasible, ensure network segmentation and use of mutual TLS (mTLS) to add additional authentication layers.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-3969 — 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-2017-3969 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