CVE-2017-9600
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 "Peoples Bank Tulsa" by Peoples Bank - OK app 3.0.2 -- aka peoples-bank-tulsa/id1074279285 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 application 'Peoples Bank Tulsa' version 3.0.2 fails to validate X.509 certificates from SSL/TLS servers during HTTPS connections. The app accepts any certificate presented by the server without verifying the certificate chain, hostname, or validity, enabling man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept traffic and capture sensitive information by presenting fraudulent certificates.
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= 3.0.2CVSS 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
- 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 if Peoples Bank Tulsa app is installedCheck iOS devices for the 'Peoples Bank Tulsa' app - look in the device app list or use Mobile Device Management (MDM) software to enumerate installed appsAffected if The app is present on any managed iOS device
-
Check the installed app versionOn the iOS device, go to Settings > Apps > Peoples Bank Tulsa > Version, or use MDM to query app version information. The affected version is exactly 3.0.2Affected if The app version is reported as 3.0.2
-
Confirm the app vendor nameCheck the app publisher/developer in the App Store listing or device app info - the affected app is published by 'Meafinancial'Affected if The app is published by Meafinancial and version equals 3.0.2
-
Understand the vulnerability scopeThis is a code-level flaw in the app's networking implementation - the app accepts any SSL/TLS certificate without validation, regardless of device settings. No network configuration can mitigate this in the app itself.Affected if The app is running and makes HTTPS network requests to the bank's servers
You are affected if the Peoples Bank Tulsa app version 3.0.2 from Meafinancial is installed on any iOS device in your environment, as the app contains insecure certificate validation that cannot be configured or disabled by the user.
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 SSL/TLS certificate validation in all network requests, including certificate chain verification and hostname validation, or implement certificate pinning for sensitive endpoints to ensure the app only trusts the legitimate server's certificate.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9600 — 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-2017-9600 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