CVE-2018-1195
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 Cloud Controller versions prior to 1.46.0, cf-deployment versions prior to 1.3.0, and cf-release versions prior to 283, Cloud Controller accepts refresh tokens for authentication where access tokens are expected. This exposes a vulnerability where a refresh token that would otherwise be insufficient to obtain an access token, either due to lack of client credentials or revocation, would allow authentication.
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 Cloud Controller versions prior to 1.46.0, cf-deployment prior to 1.3.0, and cf-release prior to 283, the system incorrectly accepts refresh tokens for authentication in places where access tokens are required. This allows authentication using refresh tokens that would otherwise be insufficient to obtain access tokens, either due to missing client credentials or because they have been revoked.
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< 1.46.0< 1.3.0< 283CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Check Cloud Controller API versionRun `cf curl /v2/info` and look for the 'api_version' field in the response, or query the /v2/capabilities endpointAffected if The version shown is earlier than 1.46.0 (for Capi Release) or the deployment uses Capi Release earlier than 1.46.0
-
Check cf-deployment versionExamine the cf-deployment manifest file or run `bosh deployments` to list deployed releases; locate the cf-deployment release and note its versionAffected if The cf-deployment version is earlier than 1.3.0
-
Check cf-release versionRun `bosh releases` or inspect the release manifest to identify the cf-release version numberAffected if The cf-release version is earlier than 283
-
Verify Capi Release version directlyRun `bosh releases | grep -i capi` or check the deployment stemcell manifest for the capi_release versionAffected if The Capi Release version is earlier than 1.46.0
If any of Cloud Controller (Capi Release), cf-deployment, or cf-release is at a version lower than 1.46.0, 1.3.0, or 283 respectively, the environment is vulnerable to accepting refresh tokens where access tokens are required.
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 data1.3.01.46.0283
Upgrade Cloud Controller to version 1.46.0 or later, cf-deployment to 1.3.0 or later, or cf-release to version 283 or later. Additionally, audit for any unauthorized access using refresh tokens during the vulnerable period.
- 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-2018-1195 — 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-2018-1195 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