CVE-2017-5004
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 · uneditedEMC RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle versions 7.0.1, 7.0.2 (all patch levels); RSA Via Lifecycle and Governance version 7.0 (all patch levels); and RSA Identity Management and Governance (IMG) version 6.9.1 (all patch levels) have Stored Cross Site Scripting vulnerabilities that could potentially be exploited by malicious users to compromise an affected system.
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 · moderate confidenceEMC RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle, RSA Via Lifecycle and Governance, and RSA Identity Management and Governance contain stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities. Malicious users can inject malicious scripts into the application that are stored on the server and executed when other users access the affected content, potentially allowing session hijacking or credential theft.
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= 7.0.1= 7.0.2= 6.9.1= 7.0CVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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.
-
Identify the installed product and versionAccess the RSA application admin console or check system inventory for the exact product name (Identity Governance and Lifecycle, Via Lifecycle and Governance, or Identity Management and Governance) and its version numberAffected if The product version is 7.0.1 or 7.0.2 for Identity Governance and Lifecycle, 7.0 for Via Lifecycle and Governance, or 6.9.1 for Identity Management and Governance
-
Confirm the application is accessible to usersVerify the RSA web interface is accessible and users can log in and submit or modify data through the applicationAffected if The application is running and accessible to users or administrators who can input data
-
Locate user input fields that store and display dataIdentify forms, fields, or APIs where users can submit data that is stored and later rendered to other users (such as user profiles, comments, descriptions, or custom attributes)Affected if User-submitted data is stored and displayed back to other users without apparent sanitization
-
Test for stored XSS vulnerabilityUsing a controlled test account, insert a benign script payload (such as <script>alert('test')</script>) into user input fields and verify if the payload executes when viewed by another user or in another contextAffected if The script payload executes and triggers an alert or other script behavior when the data is rendered
-
Review application logs for XSS exploitation indicatorsCheck application and web server logs for patterns indicating XSS attempts, such as script tags, javascript:, or event handlers (onclick, onerror) in user data fieldsAffected if Logs show suspicious script tags or malicious payloads in user input fields that may indicate exploitation attempts
A user is affected if the installed product version matches one of the affected versions (7.0.1, 7.0.2, 7.0, or 6.9.1) and the application stores and displays user-supplied data without proper validation.
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 proper input validation and output encoding for all user-supplied data throughout the application. Utilize a whitelist approach for input validation and ensure all data rendered in HTML, JavaScript, or other contexts is properly escaped based on the output context.
- 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-2017-5004 — 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-2017-5004 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