CVE-2017-4966
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in these Pivotal RabbitMQ versions: all 3.4.x versions, all 3.5.x versions, and 3.6.x versions prior to 3.6.9; and these RabbitMQ for PCF versions: all 1.5.x versions, 1.6.x versions prior to 1.6.18, and 1.7.x versions prior to 1.7.15. RabbitMQ management UI stores signed-in user credentials in a browser's local storage without expiration, making it possible to retrieve them using a chained attack.
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 RabbitMQ management UI stores user authentication credentials in the browser's local storage without any expiration time. This allows credentials to persist indefinitely in the browser, enabling an attacker who can execute a chained attack (such as XSS) to retrieve the stored credentials from local storage.
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= 9.0= 3.4.0= 3.4.1= 3.4.2= 3.4.3= 3.4.4= 3.5.0= 3.5.1= 3.5.2= 3.5.3= 3.5.6= 3.6.7= 3.5.4= 3.5.5= 3.5.7= 3.6.0= 3.6.1= 3.6.2= 3.6.3= 3.6.4= 3.6.5= 3.6.6= 1.5.0= 1.5.1CVSS 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
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/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 RabbitMQ installation and versionRun 'rabbitmqctl status' or 'rabbitmqctl version' to determine the installed RabbitMQ versionAffected if The reported version matches any of the affected versions listed (3.4.0-3.4.4, 3.5.0-3.5.7, 3.6.0-3.6.7, 1.5.0-1.5.1)
-
Verify management UI plugin is enabledRun 'rabbitmq-plugins list' or check rabbitmq management plugin configuration to see if the management plugin is enabledAffected if The rabbitmq_management plugin is enabled and the version is within the affected range
-
Confirm management UI is accessibleCheck if port 15672 (default management UI port) is open and listening by running 'netstat -tlnp | grep 15672' or checking firewall rulesAffected if The management UI port is accessible and the RabbitMQ version is affected
-
Check browser local storage behaviorIf you have access to a browser that has logged into the RabbitMQ management UI, open browser developer tools (F12), go to Application tab, select Local Storage, and look for keys containing 'rabbitmq' or authentication tokensAffected if Credentials or auth tokens are found stored in localStorage without expiration for an affected version
You are affected if RabbitMQ version is within 3.4.0-3.4.4, 3.5.0-3.5.7, 3.6.0-3.6.7, or 1.5.0-1.5.1 AND the management UI plugin is enabled and accessible.
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 to RabbitMQ version 3.6.9 or later (or 3.7+/3.8+), and for PCF deployments upgrade to RabbitMQ for PCF 1.6.18+/1.7.15+. Consider using session-based storage instead of localStorage for credentials.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-4966 — 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-2017-4966 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