CVE-2018-0365
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 Cisco Firepower Management Center could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attack and perform arbitrary actions on an affected device. The vulnerability is due to insufficient CSRF protections for the web-based management interface of the affected device. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by persuading a user of the interface to follow a malicious link. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to perform arbitrary actions on the targeted device via a web browser and with the privileges of the user. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvb19750.
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 confidenceA CSRF vulnerability exists in the Cisco Firepower Management Center web-based management interface due to insufficient anti-CSRF protections. An unauthenticated remote attacker can craft malicious links that, when clicked by an authenticated user, cause the user's browser to execute unauthorized actions with the user's privileges on the affected device.
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= 6.0.1= 6.1.0= 6.2.0= 6.2.1= 6.2.2= 6.2.3= 6.0.1= 6.1.0= 6.2.0= 6.2.1= 6.2.2= 6.2.3= 6.0.1= 6.1.0= 6.2.0= 6.2.1= 6.2.2= 6.2.3= 6.0.1= 6.1.0= 6.2.0= 6.2.1= 6.2.2= 6.2.3= 6.0.1= 6.1.0= 6.2.0= 6.2.1= 6.2.2= 6.2.3= 6.0.1= 6.1.0= 6.2.0= 6.2.1= 6.2.2= 6.2.3= 6.0.1= 6.1.0= 6.2.0= 6.2.1= 6.2.2= 6.2.3= 6.0.1= 6.1.0= 6.2.0= 6.2.1= 6.2.2= 6.2.3CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Identify the installed product and versionAccess the Firepower Management Center web interface and check the System > Updates page, or log into the appliance CLI and run 'show version' or 'sudo sfcli -c show system-info' to display the firmware version.Affected if The version matches 6.0.1, 6.1.0, 6.2.0, 6.2.1, 6.2.2, or 6.2.3 for either the Management Center or the Firepower Appliance firmware.
-
Confirm web management interface is accessibleVerify that the Firepower web-based management interface is reachable on the network (typically ports 443 or 8443). Attempt to reach the login page via HTTPS.Affected if The web interface is exposed and reachable, making CSRF attacks possible against authenticated users.
-
Inspect HTTP responses for CSRF token presenceLog into the management interface using a test account, then use browser developer tools or a proxy (Burp Suite) to capture HTTP responses. Examine POST request bodies and response headers for anti-CSRF tokens such as 'csrf_token', 'CSRFToken', or similar parameters.Affected if No anti-CSRF tokens are found in the web interface requests, indicating the vulnerability is present.
-
Verify session tokens change on re-authenticationLog out and log back in, then compare the CSRF token values from the first and second sessions. They should be different.Affected if Tokens remain the same across sessions or are absent entirely, confirming insufficient CSRF protection.
If the installed version is 6.0.1 through 6.2.3 and the web management interface is accessible without proper CSRF token validation, the environment is affected by CVE-2018-0365.
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 dataApply the vendor patch from Cisco for CSCvb19750 to implement proper CSRF token validation in the web management interface.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-0365 — 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-2018-0365 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