CVE-2017-8993
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 Remote Cross-Site Scripting vulnerability in HPE Project and Portfolio Management (PPM) version v9.30, v9.31, v9.32, v9.40 was found.
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 confidenceA reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in HPE Project and Portfolio Management (PPM) versions v9.30 through v9.40 allows remote attackers to inject malicious JavaScript code through unspecified vectors. The vulnerability is exploitable via network and requires user interaction (e.g., clicking a crafted link), resulting in partial confidentiality and integrity impact.
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= 9.3.0= 9.3.1= 9.3.2= 9.4.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 installed PPM versionAccess the HPE PPM web interface and check the About or Help section for the version number, or query the PPM server's administration console for the installed versionAffected if The installed version matches 9.3.0, 9.3.1, 9.3.2, or 9.4.0
-
Verify PPM web interface is exposedConfirm the HPE PPM web portal is accessible over HTTP/HTTPS from the network (e.g., access the default PPM URL such as http(s)://<hostname>/ppm)Affected if The web interface is accessible and the version falls within the affected range
-
Check for XSS in web parametersReview HTTP requests and responses for the PPM application, specifically looking at URL parameters and form inputs that are reflected back in the response without proper encodingAffected if User-supplied input in URL parameters is reflected in the response without sanitization or encoding
A user is affected if their HPE PPM installation is version 9.3.0, 9.3.1, 9.3.2, or 9.4.0 and the web interface is accessible, with unsanitized user input being reflected in HTTP responses.
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 dataApply vendor-supplied patches for HPE PPM v9.30-v9.40. Until patched, implement output encoding and input validation on user-supplied fields, and consider web application firewall rules to detect and block XSS payloads.
- 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-2017-8993 — 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-2017-8993 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