dbcve.org
Secure Firewall Threat DefenseApplication · Cisco

CVE-2018-0297

MEDIUM · 5.8 CVSS v3.0 Published 2018-05-17
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
67/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
A vulnerability in the detection engine of Cisco Firepower Threat Defense software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass a configured Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) Access Control (AC) policy to block SSL traffic. The vulnerability is due to the incorrect handling of TCP SSL packets received out of order. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted SSL connection through the affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to bypass a configured SSL AC policy to block SSL traffic. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvg09316.

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 confidence

A vulnerability in Cisco Firepower Threat Defense's detection engine allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to bypass a configured SSL Access Control policy that would normally block SSL traffic. The flaw is due to incorrect handling of TCP SSL packets received out of order. An attacker can exploit this by sending a crafted SSL connection through the affected device.

MitigationApply the Cisco patch for CSCvg09316 to the Firepower Threat Defense software. Verify that the SSL Access Control policy correctly blocks SSL traffic after the update.

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
Secure Firewall Threat DefenseApplication
Affected:= 6.0.0= 6.1.0= 6.2.0= 6.2.2

CVSS 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
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Determine the installed Firepower Threat Defense version
    Use the command 'show version' or check the device management interface to identify the exact FTD software version
    Affected if The installed version is exactly 6.0.0, 6.1.0, 6.2.0, or 6.2.2
  2. Verify an SSL Access Control policy exists
    Access the Firepower Management Center or FTD device and navigate to Policies > Access Control > SSL to confirm an SSL policy is defined
    Affected if An SSL Access Control policy is configured on the device
  3. Confirm the SSL policy is set to block SSL traffic
    Inspect the SSL Access Control policy rules and verify at least one rule is configured to block SSL traffic (not just inspect or trust)
    Affected if The SSL Access Control policy contains rules that block SSL traffic (versus only inspecting or allowing)
  4. Verify the device is actively processing SSL traffic
    Use 'show conn' or check traffic logs to confirm the device is handling SSL/TLS connections that would be subject to the SSL Access Control policy
    Affected if The device is processing SSL/TLS connections that should be blocked by the SSL Access Control policy

You are affected if your FTD version is exactly 6.0.0, 6.1.0, 6.2.0, or 6.2.2 AND you have an SSL Access Control policy configured to block SSL traffic that the device is actively processing.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply the Cisco patch for CSCvg09316 to the Firepower Threat Defense software. Verify that the SSL Access Control policy correctly blocks SSL traffic after the update.

Fix this in Secure Firewall Threat Defense Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
20.0 hours of engineering $3,500
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,600.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-0297 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-0297 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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