CVE-2017-4920
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 implementation of the OSPF protocol in VMware NSX-V Edge 6.2.x prior to 6.2.8 and NSX-V Edge 6.3.x prior to 6.3.3 doesn't correctly handle the link-state advertisement (LSA). A rogue LSA may exploit this issue resulting in continuous sending of LSAs between two routers eventually going in loop or loss of connectivity.
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 OSPF protocol implementation in VMware NSX-V Edge versions prior to 6.2.8 and 6.3.3 contains a flaw in handling link-state advertisements (LSAs). A malicious or malformed LSA can trigger continuous LSA exchange between routers, creating a routing loop that leads to network connectivity loss.
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>= 6.2.0, < 6.2.8>= 6.3.0, < 6.3.3CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 if NSX-V Edge is deployedLocate VMware NSX-V Edge appliances in your environment inventory or via vSphere/vCenter documentationAffected if No NSX-V Edge found means not affected by this CVE
-
Determine NSX-V Edge versionCheck the installed NSX-V Edge version through the NSX manager UI, CLI (show version), or vSphere inventoryAffected if Version is 6.2.0 through 6.2.7, or 6.3.0 through 6.3.2 (falls within >= 6.2.0 < 6.2.8 or >= 6.3.0 < 6.3.3)
-
Verify OSPF is configuredInspect the NSX-V Edge routing configuration to confirm OSPF protocol is enabled and has active areas or interfacesAffected if OSPF is not configured or disabled means the routing loop flaw cannot be triggered
You are affected if you have NSX-V Edge versions 6.2.0-6.2.7 or 6.3.0-6.3.2 with OSPF protocol actively configured.
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 data6.2.86.3.3
Upgrade NSX-V Edge to version 6.2.8 or 6.3.3 or later to resolve the improper LSA handling in the OSPF implementation.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-4920 — 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-2017-4920 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