CVE-2018-10232
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 · uneditedCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in TOPdesk before 8.05.017 (June 2018 version) and before 5.7.SR9 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of authenticated users for requests that can obtain sensitive information via unspecified vectors.
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 request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in TOPdesk before versions 8.05.017 and 5.7.SR9 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of already-authenticated users. The attack can lead to unauthorized sensitive information disclosure through unspecified vectors, leveraging the trusted session of a logged-in user.
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>= 8.05.001, < 8.05.017= 5.7CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 installed TOPdesk versionLocate the version information in the TOPdesk application (typically found in the software's 'About' section, help menu, or system administration panel). Alternatively, check version files or the application header returned by the TOPdesk web interface.Affected if The installed version is 8.05.001 through 8.05.016, or version 5.7 (any subversion).
-
Confirm the exact version numberCompare your identified version against the affected ranges: 8.05.001 <= version < 8.05.017, or version 5.7.Affected if The version falls within the affected ranges and is not 8.05.017 or later, or 5.7.SR9 or later.
-
Verify presence of authenticated user sessionsReview active user sessions in TOPdesk administrative console or session management logs to confirm users can maintain authenticated sessions.Affected if Active authenticated sessions exist in the environment; the CSRF vulnerability exploits trusted sessions of logged-in users.
-
Assess anti-CSRF protectionsInspect whether state-changing requests in TOPdesk require and validate anti-CSRF tokens or unique request identifiers.Affected if State-changing requests lack anti-CSRF token validation, allowing attackers to craft malicious requests using a user's trusted session.
You are affected if your TOPdesk installation version is 8.05.001 through 8.05.016, or exactly version 5.7, and users maintain active authenticated sessions that could be exploited via CSRF.
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 data8.05.017
Upgrade TOPdesk to version 8.05.017 (June 2018) or later, or version 5.7.SR9 or later. Additionally, implement anti-CSRF tokens across all state-changing requests to prevent session hijacking.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-10232 — 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-2018-10232 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