Ultra Services FrameworkApplication · Cisco
CVE-2017-6708
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 symbolic link (symlink) creation functionality of the AutoVNF tool for the Cisco Ultra Services Framework could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to read sensitive files or execute malicious code on an affected system. The vulnerability is due to the absence of validation checks for the input that is used to create symbolic links. This vulnerability affects all releases of the Cisco Ultra Services Framework prior to Releases 5.0.3 and 5.1. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvc76654.
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 confidenceA path traversal/symlink vulnerability in the AutoVNF tool's symlink creation function lacks input validation, allowing unauthenticated remote attackers to create arbitrary symbolic links. This enables sensitive file disclosure (reading arbitrary files on the system) and potentially remote code execution by pointing symlinks to malicious locations.
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
Ultra Services FrameworkApplication
<= 5.0.2CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Identify Cisco Ultra Services Framework deploymentLocate any installed instances of Cisco Ultra Services Framework in your environment. This may be visible in your software inventory, package lists, or system documentation.Affected if Cisco Ultra Services Framework is deployed and no version check has been performed
-
Check installed versionDetermine the exact version number of the Cisco Ultra Services Framework installation. Compare this version against the affected range of <= 5.0.2.Affected if The installed version is 5.0.2 or earlier
-
Verify AutoVNF accessibilityDetermine if the AutoVNF management interface is network-accessible. Check firewall rules, ACLs, or network exposure settings for the AutoVNF component.Affected if AutoVNF is exposed to untrusted networks or the internet
-
Inspect for unauthorized symlinksSearch the filesystem for symbolic links that were created outside of normal operations, particularly in directories writable by the AutoVNF application. Review recent symlink creation timestamps.Affected if Unexpected or unauthorized symbolic links exist on the system pointing to sensitive locations
-
Review AutoVNF access logsExamine authentication and request logs for the AutoVNF component. Look for anomalous symlink creation requests, especially from unauthenticated or unexpected sources.Affected if Logs show symlink creation requests from unauthenticated remote sources
You are affected if Cisco Ultra Services Framework version 5.0.2 or earlier is installed with an accessible AutoVNF interface.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade Cisco Ultra Services Framework to Releases 5.0.3 or 5.1 and later to obtain the fixed version of AutoVNF. If immediate upgrade is not possible, consider network segmentation to limit exposure of the AutoVNF management interface.
Cisco Ultra Services Framework Release 5.0.3 or later, or Release 5.1 or later
- Back up the current Cisco Ultra Services Framework configuration and data
- Download Cisco Ultra Services Framework Release 5.0.3 or later (or Release 5.1 or later) from the Cisco download portal
- Review the Cisco Ultra Services Framework upgrade guide for your deployment type
- Execute the upgrade procedure according to Cisco's official documentation
- Verify that the AutoVNF component has been updated to the fixed version
- Validate that symlink creation in AutoVNF now properly validates input before creating symbolic links
- Confirm the vulnerability is no longer exploitable
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Ultra Services Framework
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 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 $8,928.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-6708 — 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-2017-6708 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