Email EncryptionApplication · Cisco
CVE-2018-0208
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 web-based management interface of the (cloud based) Cisco Registered Envelope Service could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to conduct a cross-site scripting (XSS) attack against a user of the web-based management interface of the affected service. The vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of user-supplied input that is processed by the web-based management interface of the affected service. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by persuading a user of the interface to click a malicious link. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary script code in the context of the interface or access sensitive browser-based information. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvg74126.
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 confidenceCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Cisco Registered Envelope Service's web-based management interface allows authenticated attackers to inject malicious scripts via insufficiently validated user input. Successful exploitation enables arbitrary script execution in the context of the interface or access to sensitive browser-based information.
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
Email EncryptionApplication
= 5.3.0CVSS 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 your Cisco Email Encryption versionLog into your Cisco Registered Envelope Service administrative console and navigate to the 'About' or 'System Information' section to view the software version. Alternatively, check any billing or provisioning documentation from Cisco that shows the service version.Affected if The displayed version is exactly 5.3.0
-
Confirm access to the web-based management interfaceNavigate to the Cisco Registered Envelope Service portal URL (typically envelope.cisco.com or your organization's custom instance) and verify you can access the administrative or user management interface.Affected if The web interface is accessible and you have authenticated access to it
-
Test for reflective XSS in user input fieldsIn the web management interface, locate input fields such as search boxes, user profile fields, or envelope customization options. Enter a benign XSS test payload such as '<script>alert(1)</script>' into these fields and observe if the script executes or is reflected unescaped in the response.Affected if The payload is reflected verbatim in the page source without HTML encoding or sanitization, indicating the XSS vulnerability is present
-
Verify patch status with CiscoContact your Cisco support representative or account team and explicitly ask whether the patch for CSCvg74126 has been applied to your Registered Envelope Service instance.Affected if Cisco confirms the patch has NOT been applied or is unable to verify its status
You are affected if you are using Cisco Email Encryption version 5.3.0 with an accessible web management interface and Cisco has not confirmed that the CSCvg74126 patch has been applied.
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 dataSince this is a cloud-based SaaS, customers cannot implement direct code fixes. Organizations should verify with Cisco that the patch (CSCvg74126) has been applied and educate users about risks of clicking untrusted links.
Fix this in Email Encryption
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-0208 — 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-2018-0208 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