Elastic Services ControllerApplication · Cisco
CVE-2017-6689
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 vulnerability in the ConfD CLI of Cisco Elastic Services Controllers could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to log in to an affected system as the admin user, aka an Insecure Default Administrator Credentials Vulnerability. More Information: CSCvc76661. Known Affected Releases: 2.2(9.76).
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 Cisco Elastic Services Controller's ConfD CLI has an insecure default administrator credentials vulnerability. An authenticated remote attacker can leverage default admin credentials to gain full administrative access to the affected system through the ConfD CLI interface.
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
Elastic Services ControllerApplication
= 2.2\(9.76\)CVSS 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.
-
Confirm Cisco Elastic Services Controller installationIdentify if Cisco Elastic Services Controller software is installed on the system by checking for the product binaries or running processes related to ESCAffected if The software is installed and accessible on the network
-
Check installed ESC versionRun the command to display the Cisco Elastic Services Controller version, typically via 'show version' or checking the software release informationAffected if The installed version matches 2.2(9.76)
-
Verify ConfD CLI accessibilityAttempt to access the ConfD CLI interface on the affected system, typically on port 2024 or 2025 for the CLI serviceAffected if The ConfD CLI interface is accessible and responds to authentication attempts
-
Test default credentialsAttempt to authenticate to the ConfD CLI using the default admin username with default passwords such as 'admin' or the password set during initial installationAffected if Authentication succeeds using the default admin account credentials without having been changed from defaults
A user is affected if Cisco Elastic Services Controller version 2.2(9.76) is installed and the ConfD CLI admin account still uses default credentials that have not been changed from the factory defaults.
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 dataImmediately change the default admin password on all affected Cisco Elastic Services Controller installations to a strong, unique credential. If patches are available from Cisco, apply them according to vendor guidance.
Fix this in Elastic Services Controller
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,456.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-6689 — 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-2017-6689 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