CVE-2017-5197
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 · uneditedThere is XSS in SilverStripe CMS before 3.4.4 and 3.5.x before 3.5.2. The attack vector is a page name. An example payload is a crafted JavaScript event handler within a malformed SVG element.
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 confidenceSilverStripe CMS before versions 3.4.4 and 3.5.2 contains a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the page name field. Attackers can inject malicious JavaScript by crafting an SVG element with an event handler within the page name. When other users view or edit pages listing these names, the embedded JavaScript executes in their browser context.
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<= 3.4.3= 3.5.0= 3.5.1CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 installed SilverStripe CMS versionCheck the composer.json file in the web root for the 'silverstripe/framework' or 'silverstripe/cms' version entry, or look for a version.php file in the framework directoryAffected if The version is 3.4.3 or earlier, or exactly 3.5.0 or 3.5.1
-
Verify database access for page namesQuery the SiteTree or Page table in the database (usually via phpMyAdmin or command line) to examine the URLSegment or Title fields which serve as page namesAffected if Page name fields contain unencoded SVG markup such as <svg> or event handler attributes like onload, onerror, or onclick within the page name value
-
Check CMS user permissions for page creationLog into the SilverStripe admin panel and verify if your user role has permission to create or edit pages (permission code: CMS_ACCESS_CMSMain or SITETREE_EDIT_ALL)Affected if You have page editing permissions on an affected version, meaning you could potentially inject malicious content or others could have done so
-
Inspect page name output encodingView the page tree in the CMS admin panel or the live website to see if page names render with raw HTML or properly escaped textAffected if Page names display raw HTML/SVG markup instead of escaped text, confirming the XSS vulnerability is present
You are affected if your SilverStripe CMS version is 3.4.3 or earlier, or 3.5.0/3.5.1, and page names in your database or displayed output contain unescaped SVG elements with event handlers.
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 SilverStripe CMS to version 3.4.4, 3.5.2, or later. Alternatively, implement strict input validation and output encoding on all page name fields to neutralize SVG and event handler constructs.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-5197 — 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-2017-5197 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