CVE-2017-9579
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 · uneditedThe "JMCU Mobile Banking" by Joplin Metro Credit Union app 3.0.0 -- aka jmcu-mobile-banking/id716065893 for iOS does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.
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 confidenceThe iOS mobile banking app fails to validate SSL/TLS server X.509 certificates, allowing any certificate to be accepted during HTTPS connections. This enables man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept encrypted sessions by presenting fraudulent certificates, potentially exposing login credentials, session tokens, and sensitive financial data.
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= 3.0.0CVSS 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
- 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 installed app versionOn the iOS device, go to Settings > General > iPhone Storage (or Settings > Apps > Meafinancial Jmcu Mobile Banking). Locate the version number displayed under the app name. Alternatively, open the App Store, search for Meafinancial Jmcu Mobile Banking, and view the version information in the app listing.Affected if The version listed is 3.0.0 exactly
-
Verify app presence in enterprise mobile device managementIf your organization uses MDM (Mobile Device Management) software such as Jamf, Microsoft Intune, or VMware Workspace ONE, query the device inventory for installed applications. Filter for 'Meafinancial Jmcu Mobile Banking' or 'Jmcu' and retrieve the version attribute for each enrolled device.Affected if Any managed device shows version 3.0.0 of the Meafinancial Jmcu Mobile Banking app installed
-
Check app usage in your organizationSurvey your organization's employees or device inventory records to determine if the Meafinancial Jmcu Mobile Banking app version 3.0.0 is deployed or in use. This may involve reviewing app catalogs, device enrollment lists, or user surveys.Affected if The app at version 3.0.0 is present in your organization's mobile device ecosystem
Your environment is affected if any iOS device in your organization has Meafinancial Jmcu Mobile Banking version 3.0.0 installed, as this version lacks SSL/TLS certificate validation and is vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks.
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 dataImplement proper certificate chain-of-trust validation with hostname verification in all network requests; consider adding certificate pinning for the banking server's certificate to prevent MITM attacks.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation20.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $12,288.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9579 — 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-2017-9579 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