CVE-2018-10650
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 · uneditedThere is an Insufficient Path Validation Vulnerability in Citrix XenMobile Server 10.8 before RP2 and 10.7 before RP3.
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 · moderate confidenceCitrix XenMobile Server versions 10.8 before RP2 and 10.7 before RP3 contain an insufficient path validation vulnerability, allowing attackers to potentially access files outside the intended directory structure through path traversal attacks.
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= 10.8= 10.7CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/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 XenMobile Server versionAccess the XenMobile Server admin console or check the installation. Typically done via the /zdm/ステータス page or by reviewing system information in the admin UI. The version is displayed in the console header or about section.Affected if The displayed version shows 10.8 or 10.7 without the corresponding rollup patch (RP2 for 10.8, RP3 for 10.7)
-
Confirm the installed rollup patchIn the XenMobile Server console, navigate to the Updates or System information section to view the installed Rollup Patch (RP) number.Affected if No RP is installed, or the RP number is lower than RP2 for version 10.8, or lower than RP3 for version 10.7
-
Verify web interface accessibilityConfirm that the XenMobile Server web interface (typically ports 8443 or 443) is accessible from network locations where potential attackers could send path traversal requests.Affected if The web interface is exposed externally or to untrusted networks without additional access controls
You are affected if your XenMobile Server runs version 10.8 before RP2 or version 10.7 before RP3, and the web interface is accessible to send path traversal requests.
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-supplied patches: update XenMobile Server 10.8 to RP2 or 10.7 to RP3 as appropriate.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $4,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-10650 — 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-2018-10650 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