CVE-2017-4014
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 · uneditedSession Side jacking vulnerability in the server in McAfee Network Data Loss Prevention (NDLP) 9.3.x allows remote authenticated users to view, add, and remove users via modification of the HTTP request.
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 confidenceSession side-jacking vulnerability in McAfee NDLP 9.3.x allows authenticated users to hijack valid sessions and perform unauthorized user management operations (view, add, remove users) by modifying HTTP requests. This indicates inadequate session validation and authorization controls on the server-side, allowing attackers with valid credentials to exceed their intended permissions.
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<= 9.3.0CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed McAfee NDLP versionAccess the NDLP administration console or use the product's version information command/interface to determine the exact version number installedAffected if The installed version is 9.3.0 or any earlier version (9.x <= 9.3.0)
-
Verify user management interface is accessibleConfirm the NDLP web console or administrative interface is accessible and user management functionality (view, add, remove users) is enabledAffected if The user management module is accessible without additional security controls beyond authentication
-
Check session token handling configurationReview NDLP server configuration files or settings related to session management, looking for how session tokens are validatedAffected if Session tokens are validated only client-side or not re-validated on sensitive operations like user management
-
Confirm authentication is required for exploitationVerify that valid credentials are required to access the user management functionalityAffected if The vulnerability requires valid credentials but allows privilege escalation beyond the user's intended permissions
You are affected if McAfee NDLP version 9.3.0 or earlier is installed and the user management interface is accessible to authenticated users without server-side authorization validation on each request.
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 robust session token validation with proper server-side checks, enforce principle of least privilege in authorization, validate all HTTP request parameters server-side, and consider implementing CSRF tokens for user management operations.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-4014 — 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-2017-4014 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