CVE-2017-9339
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 logical error in ownCloud Server before 10.0.2 caused disclosure of valid share tokens for public calendars. Thus granting an attacker potentially access to publicly shared calendars without knowing the share token.
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 logical error in ownCloud Server before version 10.0.2 caused the disclosure of valid share tokens for public calendars. This flaw allowed attackers to potentially access publicly shared calendars without knowing the share token, bypassing the intended access control mechanism.
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< 10.0.2CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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.
-
Determine the installed ownCloud Server versionAccess the ownCloud admin panel and navigate to the 'Admin' or 'Server Info' page to view the current version. Alternatively, check the version.php file in the ownCloud root directory if you have file system access.Affected if The installed version is below 10.0.2 (for example, 10.0.1, 10.0.0, or earlier releases).
-
Verify the Calendar app is enabledLog in as an administrator, go to the Apps management section, and check if the Calendar application is installed and enabled.Affected if The Calendar app is listed as enabled in the ownCloud apps configuration.
-
Identify publicly shared calendarsUse the ownCloud OCS API or web interface to enumerate calendar home sets and check for public share links. Public shares typically have share type 3 (public link) in the oc_share table if you have database access, or appear as shareable calendar links in the UI.Affected if Any calendars have been shared publicly via a share link, making them accessible without authentication.
-
Check for share token exposureInspect the URL or API responses when accessing publicly shared calendars. The vulnerability allows valid share tokens to be disclosed in responses or redirects, potentially exposing tokens that should remain private.Affected if The system returns or exposes share tokens for publicly shared calendars in a way that bypasses the intended access control (for example, in API responses visible without the token).
You are affected if ownCloud Server is version 10.0.2 or earlier, the Calendar app is enabled, and public calendar shares exist in your environment.
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 data10.0.2
Upgrade ownCloud Server to version 10.0.2 or later to resolve the logical error that causes share token disclosure in public calendar sharing.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9339 — 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-2017-9339 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