CVE-2018-11320
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 · uneditedIn Octopus Deploy 2018.4.4 through 2018.5.1, Octopus variables that are sourced from the target do not have sensitive values obfuscated in the deployment logs.
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 confidenceIn Octopus Deploy versions 2018.4.4 through 2018.5.1, sensitive variable values sourced from deployment targets (such as passwords, API keys, or connection strings) are logged in plaintext during deployment processes without obfuscation, exposing confidential credentials in deployment logs.
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>= 2018.4.4, <= 2018.5.1CVSS 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 Octopus Server versionNavigate to the Octopus Web UI, click the username in the top-right, and select 'About' to view the server version. Alternatively, check the Windows Programs and Features list or the install directory for version information.Affected if The installed version is 2018.4.4, 2018.4.5, 2018.4.6, 2018.4.7, 2018.4.8, 2018.4.9, 2018.4.10, 2018.4.11, 2018.4.12, 2018.5.0, or 2018.5.1
-
Review deployment processes for sensitive variablesIn the Octopus Web UI, navigate to Projects > select a project > Variables. Identify any variables marked as sensitive or containing values that look like passwords, API keys, connection strings, or tokens.Affected if Sensitive variables (type='Sensitive') or variables with credential-like values are defined in deployment processes
-
Inspect deployment logs for plaintext secretsGo to Tasks > select a recent deployment task > View Raw Log. Search for plaintext occurrences of known sensitive variable values (passwords, API keys, connection strings) that should have been obfuscated.Affected if Deployment logs contain plaintext sensitive variable values that should have been masked
-
Check variable usage in step templatesReview deployment step templates and scripts. Look for cases where sensitive variables are output or written to logs via #{VariableName} syntax in custom scripts or output variables.Affected if Sensitive variables are referenced in deployment scripts or step outputs that write to logs
You are affected if your Octopus Server version is between 2018.4.4 and 2018.5.1 inclusive and you use sensitive variables in deployments that could appear in plaintext in logs.
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 dataUpgrade Octopus Deploy to version 2018.5.2 or later. Audit existing deployment logs for exposed sensitive data and rotate any credentials that may have been disclosed.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-11320 — 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-2018-11320 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