Prime NetworkApplication · Cisco
CVE-2018-0137
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 vulnerability in the TCP throttling process of Cisco Prime Network could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause a denial of service (DoS) condition on an affected device. The vulnerability is due to insufficient rate limiting protection for TCP listening ports. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending the affected device a high rate of TCP SYN packets to the local IP address of the targeted application. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause the device to consume a high amount of memory and become slow, or to stop accepting new TCP connections to the application. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvg48152.
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 confidenceCisco Prime Network contains a flaw in its TCP throttling mechanism where rate limiting protections for TCP listening ports are insufficient. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this by sending a high volume of TCP SYN packets to the targeted application's local IP address, causing excessive memory consumption that renders the device unresponsive or unable to accept new TCP connections.
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
Prime NetworkApplication
= 4.3\(0.0\)pp6= 4.3\(2.0\)pp1CVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
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.
-
Confirm Cisco Prime Network installationIdentify the installed product name - the vulnerability affects only Cisco Prime Network. Check system inventory, installed software list, or product documentation.Affected if The product is not Cisco Prime Network (the vulnerability does not apply to other Cisco products)
-
Determine installed versionLocate the installed version of Cisco Prime Network. This is typically shown in the product GUI under Help > About, in the CLI show version output, or in the installation directory version file. Compare your version against the affected versions: 4.3(0.0)pp6 or 4.3(2.0)pp1.Affected if Your installed version is exactly 4.3(0.0)pp6 or exactly 4.3(2.0)pp1
-
Verify TCP listening ports are exposedIdentify the TCP listening ports configured on the Cisco Prime Network server. Check network configuration files, running services (netstat -an), or the application listener configuration.Affected if TCP listening ports are reachable from untrusted networks - the attacker needs to send TCP SYN packets to these ports to trigger the memory exhaustion
-
Inspect TCP SYN rate limiting configurationReview the TCP throttling or SYN rate limiting settings in the product configuration. Check whether SYN flood protections or rate limits are configured on the affected listening ports.Affected if No SYN rate limiting is configured on the TCP listening ports, or the existing limits are insufficient to prevent memory exhaustion under high SYN packet volume
You are affected if you are running Cisco Prime Network version 4.3(0.0)pp6 or 4.3(2.0)pp1 with TCP listening ports exposed to the attacker and without adequate SYN rate limiting configured.
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 TCP SYN rate limiting on affected listening ports or apply the Cisco patch for CSCvg48152. Consider deploying network-level SYN flood protections such as SYN proxies or traffic scrubbing services.
Fix this in Prime Network
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $3,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-0137 — 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-2018-0137 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