CVE-2017-7928
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 · uneditedAn Improper Access Control issue was discovered in Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories (SEL) SEL-3620 and SEL-3622 Security Gateway Versions R202 and, R203, R203-V1, R203-V2 and, R204, R204-V1. The device does not properly enforce access control while configured for NAT port forwarding, which may allow for unauthorized communications to downstream devices.
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 confidenceThe SEL SEL-3620 and SEL-3622 Security Gateways have an improper access control vulnerability when configured for NAT port forwarding. The device fails to properly enforce access controls on forwarded NAT traffic, allowing unauthorized communications to reach downstream devices on the internal network.
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= r202= r203= r203-v= r203-v1= r204= r204-v1= r202= r203= r203-v= r203-v1= r204= r204-v1CVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/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 device modelAccess the SEL SEL-3620 or SEL-3622 device console or web interface and confirm the exact model number displayed in the system information or device statusAffected if Device is not an SEL SEL-3620 or SEL-3622 Security Gateway
-
Check the installed firmware versionAccess the device firmware or system information page and note the firmware version string (such as r202, r203, r203-v, r203-v1, r204, or r204-v1)Affected if Firmware version matches one of the affected versions: r202, r203, r203-v, r203-v1, r204, or r204-v1
-
Verify if NAT port forwarding is configuredNavigate to the NAT port forwarding configuration section in the device web interface or CLI and check whether any port forwarding rules are defined and enabledAffected if NAT port forwarding rules are actively configured on the device
-
Inspect NAT port forwarding rule settingsReview each NAT port forwarding rule and check whether source IP address restrictions or access control lists are defined to limit which external IPs can reach internal destinationsAffected if NAT port forwarding is configured without source IP address restrictions or access control filtering
You are affected if you have an SEL-3620 or SEL-3622 gateway running any of the affected firmware versions (r202 through r204-v1) and have NAT port forwarding rules configured without source IP address restrictions.
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 dataRestrict NAT port forwarding rules to only authorized source IP addresses/networks, implement additional firewall rules on downstream devices, and contact SEL for available firmware updates that may address this access control deficiency.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation10.0 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 $7,392.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-7928 — 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-2017-7928 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