CVE-2017-7437
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 · uneditedNetIQ Privileged Account Manager before 3.1 Patch Update 3 allowed cross site scripting attacks via the "type" and "account" parameters of json requests.
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 confidenceNetIQ Privileged Account Manager before version 3.1 Patch Update 3 contains stored cross-site scripting vulnerabilities in the 'type' and 'account' parameters of JSON requests, allowing attackers to inject malicious scripts that execute in the context of other users' sessions.
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<= 3.0= 3.1CVSS 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 NetIQ PAM versionLocate the installed version of NetIQ Privileged Account Manager. Check the admin console about page, installation directory for version files, or use the product's built-in version command if available.Affected if The installed version is 3.0 or earlier, or exactly version 3.1 (versions prior to 3.1 Patch Update 3).
-
Verify web interface is enabledConfirm that the NetIQ PAM web administration console or any JSON request handler module is accessible and enabled. This is typically accessible via browser to the admin port.Affected if The web interface is exposed and accepts JSON requests containing 'type' and 'account' parameters.
-
Check for existing script injectionsReview web server access logs and application logs for any suspicious input in 'type' or 'account' parameters of JSON requests. Look for HTML tags, script elements, or JavaScript event handlers in these parameter values.Affected if Malicious scripts are found stored in logs or if the application reflects these parameters back in responses without encoding.
You are affected if NetIQ Privileged Account Manager version is 3.0 or earlier, or exactly version 3.1, and the web interface with JSON request handling is enabled.
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 to NetIQ Privileged Account Manager 3.1 Patch Update 3 or later. Additionally, implement input validation and output encoding for all user-supplied parameters in JSON requests.
- 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-2017-7437 — 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-2017-7437 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