CVE-2017-8157
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 · uneditedOceanStor 5800 V3 with software V300R002C00 and V300R002C10, OceanStor 6900 V3 V300R001C00 has an information leakage vulnerability. Products use TLS1.0 to encrypt. Attackers can exploit TLS1.0's vulnerabilities to decrypt data to obtain sensitive information.
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 confidenceHuawei OceanStor 5800 V3 and 6900 V3 storage systems with specific software versions (V300R002C00, V300R002C10, V300R001C00) use TLS 1.0 for encrypted communications. TLS 1.0 is deprecated due to known cryptographic weaknesses (including the BEAST attack) that allow attackers to decrypt sensitive data in transit between clients and the storage systems.
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= v300r002c00= v300r002c10= v300r001c00CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 the OceanStor modelAccess the storage system management interface or use the CLI command 'show system' to confirm the model is OceanStor 5800 V3 or OceanStor 6900 V3Affected if The model is not OceanStor 5800 V3 or 6900 V3, then not affected by this CVE
-
Check the firmware versionUse the storage system CLI command 'show version' or access the management GUI System Information page to retrieve the firmware versionAffected if The firmware version is exactly v300r002c00 or v300r002c10 for OceanStor 5800 V3, or v300r001c00 for OceanStor 6900 V3
-
Verify TLS 1.0 is enabled on storage protocolsAccess the storage system management GUI under Security Settings > SSL/TLS Configuration, or use CLI command 'show ssl config' to list enabled TLS versions for protocols such as iSCSI, NFS, CIFS, and HTTPS management interfacesAffected if TLS 1.0 is listed as enabled or selected for any storage protocol or management interface
-
Inspect SSL/TLS handshake logsUse packet capture or network logging tools to capture SSL/TLS handshake traffic between clients and the storage system, then inspect the ClientHello message to confirm TLS 1.0 is being offered or acceptedAffected if Captured traffic shows TLS 1.0 protocol (version 0x0301) in ClientHello or ServerHello messages
A system is affected if it is an OceanStor 5800 V3 (firmware v300r002c00 or v300r002c10) or OceanStor 6900 V3 (firmware v300r001c00) with TLS 1.0 enabled or in use for any storage protocol or management 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.
From vendor dataDisable TLS 1.0 support on the affected storage systems and enforce TLS 1.2 or higher for all storage protocols (iSCSI, NFS, CIFS, etc.), then validate that all connecting clients and applications support the minimum TLS version.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,504.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-8157 — 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-2017-8157 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