CVE-2018-1417
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 · uneditedUnder certain circumstances, a flaw in the J9 JVM (IBM SDK, Java Technology Edition 7.1 and 8.0) allows untrusted code running under a security manager to elevate its privileges. IBM X-Force ID: 138823.
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 confidenceA privilege escalation vulnerability in IBM J9 JVM (SDK Java Technology Edition 7.1 and 8.0) allows untrusted code running under a security manager to elevate its privileges beyond the restrictions imposed by that security manager, potentially bypassing Java sandbox security controls.
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= 6.0.0.0= 6.1.0.0= 7.0.0.0= 7.1.0.0= 8.0.0.0CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/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 IBM J9 JVM installationRun 'java -version' or 'java -XshowSettings:all' and examine the output for 'IBM' or 'J9' in the vendor/runtime informationAffected if The output shows IBM J9 as the JVM vendor
-
Determine IBM Java SDK versionRun 'java -version 2>&1' and check the version string against the affected versions: 6.0.0.0, 6.1.0.0, 7.0.0.0, 7.1.0.0, or 8.0.0.0Affected if The displayed version matches any of the affected versions listed in the CVE
-
Verify if security manager is in useSearch Java application startup scripts, configuration files, or running processes for '-Djava.security.manager' flag or explicit SecurityManager API usage in the application codeAffected if Applications or processes are running with a security manager enabled (java.security.manager system property set)
-
Check for sandbox-dependent codeReview application code for calls to SecurityManager checkPermission, checkRead, checkWrite, or other security constraint enforcement methods that rely on the security managerAffected if The application uses SecurityManager restrictions to constrain untrusted code execution
You are affected if IBM J9 JVM versions 6.0.0.0 through 8.0.0.0 are running with a security manager and applications depend on sandbox restrictions to limit untrusted code privileges.
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 dataUpdate IBM SDK Java Technology Edition to a patched version beyond 7.1 and 8.0, or migrate to an unaffected Java distribution. Verify that applications relying on security manager constraints are not vulnerable to privilege escalation.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 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 $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-1417 — 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-2018-1417 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