CVE-2017-6564
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 · uneditedOn Franklin Fueling Systems TS-550 evo 2.3.0.7332 devices, the Guest user, which contains the lowest privileges, can post to the idSourceFileName parameter found within the /download directory. This ability allows for an attacker to download sensitive system files from the host machine such as databases which contain information that can aid in further attacks.
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 confidenceThis is an Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability in Franklin Fueling Systems TS-550 evo devices. The /download endpoint accepts the idSourceFileName parameter without proper authorization checks, allowing any authenticated user (including the low-privilege Guest account) to request arbitrary system files from the host machine, including sensitive databases.
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= 2.3.0.7332CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 device model and firmware versionAccess the device web interface or use SNMP/SSH to query the system information. Look for the firmware version in the system settings or about page.Affected if Firmware version is 2.3.0.7332 exactly
-
Confirm the /download endpoint existsAttempt to access the URL pattern /download on the device's web server. This may require authentication first.Affected if The endpoint responds (returns any HTTP status code other than 404)
-
Verify Guest or low-privilege accounts existCheck the user management section of the web interface to enumerate available accounts. Look for a Guest account or any read-only user accounts.Affected if A Guest account or other low-privilege account is enabled on the system
-
Test for IDOR on the /download endpointUsing an authenticated session (as Guest or any low-privilege user), send a request to /download with idSourceFileName parameter pointing to a system file (e.g., ../../../../etc/passwd or a database file path).Affected if The server returns the content of arbitrary files outside the intended directory
You are affected if the device is a TS-550 evo running firmware 2.3.0.7332, the /download endpoint exists, and a low-privilege user (including Guest) can retrieve files outside the intended scope.
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 authorization checks to verify the authenticated user has permission to access the requested file, add input validation to prevent path traversal, and restrict the Guest user account to only permitted resources.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-6564 — 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-2017-6564 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