CVE-2017-7648
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 · uneditedFoscam networked devices use the same hardcoded SSL private key across different customers' installations, which allows remote attackers to defeat cryptographic protection mechanisms by leveraging knowledge of this key from another installation.
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 confidenceFoscam networked devices contain a hardcoded SSL private key that is identical across all customer installations. An attacker who obtains this key from one installation can use it to decrypt traffic or impersonate the server on any other Foscam device using the same key, completely defeating the SSL/TLS encryption protection.
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 dataall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/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 the Foscam device modelCheck the device label, product packaging, or log into the web interface and look for the model number in System or Device Info settingsAffected if The model is one of: C1, C1 Lite, C2, Fi9800xe, Fi9826p, Fi9828p, Fi9851p, or Fi9853ep
-
Confirm all firmware versions are affectedCheck the current firmware version in the device web interface under System or Device Settings. Since the advisory states all versions are affected for these models, any firmware version indicates potential exposureAffected if The device is any of the affected models regardless of firmware version
-
Inspect the SSL certificate on the deviceAccess the device web UI and export or view the SSL certificate. Alternatively, use a browser to connect to the device HTTPS interface, view the certificate details, and note the serial number, thumbprint, or subjectAffected if The certificate matches the known hardcoded Foscam certificate (the same certificate and private key is used across all installations of the same model)
-
Verify the certificate is identical across multiple devicesIf you have multiple Foscam devices of the same model, compare the SSL certificate thumbprint or serial number from each deviceAffected if Different devices of the same model share identical certificate details, indicating the hardcoded key is in use
If the device is a Foscam C1, C1 Lite, C2, Fi9800xe, Fi9826p, Fi9828p, Fi9851p, or Fi9853ep model, it uses the hardcoded SSL private key and is affected by this vulnerability.
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 dataReplace the hardcoded SSL certificates with unique, properly generated certificates per device. If vendor firmware updates are available that address this issue, apply them. Consider network segmentation to limit exposure of affected devices.
- 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-2017-7648 — 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-2017-7648 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