Mobility Services EngineApplication · Cisco
CVE-2018-0376
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 Policy Builder interface of Cisco Policy Suite before 18.2.0 could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to access the Policy Builder interface. The vulnerability is due to a lack of authentication. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by accessing the Policy Builder interface. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to make changes to existing repositories and create new repositories. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvi35109.
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 critical authentication bypass vulnerability exists in the Policy Builder interface of Cisco Policy Suite versions prior to 18.2.0. The vulnerability stems from a complete lack of authentication enforcement, allowing unauthenticated remote attackers direct access to the Policy Builder administrative interface. Successful exploitation grants attackers the ability to modify existing policy repositories and create new ones, potentially allowing full control over policy configurations.
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
Mobility Services EngineApplication
= 18.0.0
Policy SuiteApplication
< 18.2.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/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 installed Cisco Policy Suite versionLocate the installed version of Cisco Policy Suite on the system. Common methods include checking the application documentation, running version commands, or reviewing installed package information.Affected if Version is less than 18.2.0 (or version equals 18.0.0 for Cisco Mobility Services Engine)
-
Verify Policy Builder interface accessibilityDetermine if the Policy Builder web interface is reachable from the network. Check firewall rules, ACLs, or network configurations that control access to the Policy Builder port/service.Affected if The Policy Builder interface is exposed to untrusted networks without proper access controls
-
Test Policy Builder authentication enforcementAttempt to access the Policy Builder administrative interface without providing credentials. Observe whether the system grants access or properly redirects to a login page.Affected if Unauthenticated access is granted to the Policy Builder interface without any authentication challenge
-
Check for existing policy repository modificationsReview policy repository configurations and audit logs for any unauthorized changes or newly created repositories that were not initiated by legitimate administrators.Affected if Unauthorized or unexpected policy repository changes exist that were not performed by known administrators
A system is affected if it runs Cisco Policy Suite versions prior to 18.2.0 (or Cisco Mobility Services Engine 18.0.0) AND has the Policy Builder interface network-accessible without authentication enforcement.
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.
dbcve · scoped18.2.0
Upgrade to Cisco Policy Suite version 18.2.0 or later. Until patched, restrict network access to the Policy Builder interface using firewall rules or ACLs to prevent unauthorized external access.
Cisco Policy Suite 18.2.0 or later
- Identify the current version of Cisco Policy Suite running in your environment
- Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- Back up all current Policy Suite configurations and data
- Upgrade Cisco Policy Suite to version 18.2.0 or later
- After upgrade, verify that the Policy Builder interface now requires authentication
- Confirm that existing repositories are intact and accessible
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Mobility Services Engine
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing10.0 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 $7,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-0376 — 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-2018-0376 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