Tivoli Application Dependency Discovery ManagerApplication · Ibm

CVE-2018-1455

HIGH · 8.8 CVSS v3.0 Published 2018-08-15
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
95/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges

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 · unedited
IBM Tivoli Application Dependency Discovery Manager 7.2.2 and 7.3 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM X-Force ID: 11029.

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 confidence

IBM Tivoli Application Dependency Discovery Manager versions 7.2.2 and 7.3 contains a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability. The flaw allows authenticated users to be tricked into unknowingly submitting malicious requests to the web application, potentially executing unauthorized administrative actions on their behalf.

MitigationImplement anti-CSRF tokens on all state-changing operations (forms and AJAX requests), validate the Referer/Origin headers on POST requests, and set SameSite attributes on session cookies to prevent cross-origin requests.

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
Tivoli Application Dependency Discovery ManagerApplication
Affected:= 7.2.2= 7.3.0

CVSS 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
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify TADDM version
    Locate the TADDM installation directory and check the version file or use the command 'taddm version' or inspect installation logs. Common paths include /opt/IBM/TADDM or the installation root directory.
    Affected if The installed version matches exactly 7.2.2 or 7.3.0
  2. Confirm web interface is accessible
    Verify that the TADDM web console is reachable by accessing the application's URL (typically https://hostname:9433/ or similar). Check if the management console responds to HTTP/HTTPS requests.
    Affected if The TADDM web interface is accessible and the application is in use
  3. Inspect form submissions for anti-CSRF tokens
    Log into the TADDM web console and examine the HTML source of forms that perform state-changing actions (such as configuration changes, user management, or discovery tasks). Look for hidden input fields containing token values or check if forms include any CSRF token parameters.
    Affected if Forms lack anti-CSRF token fields or the tokens are missing from POST requests
  4. Check AJAX request headers
    Use browser developer tools to monitor network traffic when interacting with the TADDM console. Inspect AJAX requests that modify data to see if they include any CSRF token headers or parameters.
    Affected if AJAX requests do not include CSRF tokens in headers or body
  5. Examine session cookie attributes
    In the browser developer tools, inspect the session cookies set by the TADDM application. Check if the 'SameSite' attribute is set to 'Strict' or 'Lax' on authentication cookies.
    Affected if SameSite attribute is missing or set to 'None' on session cookies

The environment is affected if TADDM version 7.2.2 or 7.3.0 is running and the web interface lacks anti-CSRF tokens in forms and AJAX requests, or session cookies lack SameSite attributes.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement anti-CSRF tokens on all state-changing operations (forms and AJAX requests), validate the Referer/Origin headers on POST requests, and set SameSite attributes on session cookies to prevent cross-origin requests.

Fix this in Tivoli Application Dependency Discovery Manager Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-1455 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-1455 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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