CVE-2017-6031
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 · uneditedA Header Injection issue was discovered in Certec EDV GmbH atvise scada prior to Version 3.0. An "improper neutralization of HTTP headers for scripting syntax" issue has been identified, which may allow remote code execution.
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 confidenceHTTP header injection vulnerability in Certec EDV GmbH atvise SCADA prior to version 3.0 allows improper neutralization of HTTP headers containing scripting syntax, which can be exploited for remote code execution.
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<= 2.5.10CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Confirm atvise SCADA installationLocate the atvise SCADA installation directory or check system services for atvise components. Common locations include C:\Program Files\atvise or /opt/atvise on Linux systems.Affected if atvise SCADA is found on the system
-
Determine installed versionCheck the version of atvise SCADA by examining version information in the installation directory, startup scripts, or the application itself. Look for version files, manifest data, or the software's about dialog.Affected if version cannot be determined or shows a version number
-
Compare against affected rangeCompare the installed version to the affected range: any version 2.5.10 or lower is vulnerable. Versions prior to 3.0 are affected by this CVE.Affected if installed version is 2.5.10 or lower (or any version below 3.0)
-
Verify HTTP server component is activeConfirm that the atvise web server/HTTP interface component is running. This is typically the default configuration for atvise SCADA as it provides the SCADA web interface.Affected if HTTP server component is enabled and accessible
The environment is affected if atvise SCADA version 2.5.10 or lower is installed with the HTTP server component active.
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 atvise SCADA to version 3.0 or later to obtain the patch; if immediate upgrade is not feasible, implement strict input validation and filtering on all HTTP headers at the web application firewall level.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-6031 — 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-2017-6031 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