CVE-2017-5192
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 · uneditedWhen using the local_batch client from salt-api in SaltStack Salt before 2015.8.13, 2016.3.x before 2016.3.5, and 2016.11.x before 2016.11.2, external authentication is not respected, enabling all authentication to be bypassed.
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 local_batch client in salt-api fails to enforce external authentication (such as LDAP/Active Directory), allowing attackers to bypass all authentication and execute arbitrary commands on Salt minions. This authentication bypass affects SaltStack Salt versions prior to 2015.8.13, 2016.3.5, and 2016.11.2.
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<= 2015.8.12= 2016.3.0= 2016.3.1= 2016.3.2= 2016.3.3= 2016.3.4= 2016.11.0= 2016.11.1= 2016.11.2CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/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.
-
Check Salt versionRun `salt --version` or check the installed package version with `rpm -q salt` / `dpkg -l salt`Affected if The version is 2015.8.12 or earlier, 2016.3.0 through 2016.3.4, or 2016.11.0 through 2016.11.1 (note: 2016.11.2 is also listed as affected in the provided version list)
-
Verify salt-api is exposedCheck if the salt-api service is running with `systemctl status salt-api` or by viewing listening ports with `ss -tlnp | grep 8000` (default salt-api port)Affected if salt-api is running and accessible on a network interface
-
Confirm external authentication is configuredExamine the Salt master configuration file (typically /etc/salt/master) for the `external_auth` section, which defines LDAP/AD authentication backendsAffected if external_auth is configured in the Salt master config
-
Check if local_batch client endpoint is reachableInspect salt-api logs or attempt an unauthenticated request to the local_batch endpoint (e.g., /run/local_batch)Affected if The local_batch endpoint is accessible without authentication when external_auth is enabled
A user is affected if they run a vulnerable Salt version with salt-api exposed and have external authentication configured, allowing unauthenticated command execution via the local_batch client endpoint.
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 Salt to version 2015.8.13, 2016.3.5, 2016.11.2 or later. If immediate upgrade is not feasible, restrict network access to salt-api to trusted IPs only via firewall rules.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-5192 — 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-2017-5192 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