Gleez CmsApplication · Gleeztech

CVE-2018-16703

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.0 Published 2018-09-07
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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
A vulnerability in the Gleez CMS 1.2.0 login page could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to perform multiple user enumerations, which can further help an attacker to perform login attempts in excess of the configured login attempt limit. The vulnerability is due to insufficient server-side access control and login attempt limit enforcement. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending modified login attempts to the Portal login page. An exploit could allow the attacker to identify existing users and perform brute-force password attacks on the Portal, as demonstrated by navigating to the user/4 URI.

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

Gleez CMS 1.2.0 login page contains a user enumeration vulnerability where the application reveals whether usernames exist (via responses or predictable URIs like user/4) and fails to enforce configured login attempt limits. This allows unauthenticated attackers to identify valid user accounts and perform unlimited brute-force password attacks.

MitigationImplement generic login error messages that do not reveal username validity, enforce server-side rate limiting and account lockout policies, and restrict access to user profile enumeration endpoints.

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
Gleez CmsApplication
Affected:= 1.2.0

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
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

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 Gleez CMS installation and version
    Locate the Gleez CMS installation directory and check for version file or header. Common paths include checking the main index.php, a version config file, or the admin dashboard for the version number.
    Affected if The installed version is Gleez CMS 1.2.0 exactly.
  2. Test login page for user enumeration via error messages
    Submit login requests with valid usernames versus invalid usernames and compare the error responses. Submit two test requests: one with a likely-valid username (like admin) and one with a random invalid username, then observe differences in the returned messages or response codes.
    Affected if The application returns different error messages or HTTP status codes depending on whether the username exists, revealing account validity.
  3. Test user profile URI predictability
    Access sequential user profile URLs such as /user/1, /user/2, /user/3, /user/4 to see if user profile pages are accessible and reveal username information without authentication.
    Affected if User profile pages are accessible without authentication and display usernames or user information at predictable URI patterns.
  4. Verify login attempt rate limiting is enforced
    Send multiple failed login requests (10+) in quick succession using the same username, either via manual testing or a script, and observe whether the application blocks, throttles, or locks the account after a certain number of attempts.
    Affected if The application does not enforce any limit on login attempts, allowing unlimited brute-force attempts.

You are affected if you are running Gleez CMS version 1.2.0 and the login page reveals username validity or allows unlimited login attempts without rate limiting.

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 generic login error messages that do not reveal username validity, enforce server-side rate limiting and account lockout policies, and restrict access to user profile enumeration endpoints.

Fix this in Gleez Cms Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-16703 — 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-2018-16703 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