CVE-2018-17953
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 · uneditedA incorrect variable in a SUSE specific patch for pam_access rule matching in PAM 1.3.0 in openSUSE Leap 15.0 and SUSE Linux Enterprise 15 could lead to pam_access rules not being applied (fail open).
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 confidenceA SUSE-specific patch for pam_access rule matching in PAM 1.3.0 contains an incorrect variable that causes access control rules to fail open, potentially allowing unauthorized access to systems using openSUSE Leap 15.0 or SUSE Linux Enterprise 15.
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= 1.3.0CVSS 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.
-
Verify PAM version is 1.3.0Run 'rpm -q pam' or check the installed PAM package version with your system's package managerAffected if The installed PAM version equals 1.3.0 exactly
-
Confirm pam_access module is in useInspect PAM configuration files in /etc/pam.d/ and look for lines containing 'pam_access.so'Affected if The pam_access module is loaded in any PAM service configuration
-
Check OS version is openSUSE Leap 15.0 or SLE 15Run 'cat /etc/os-release' or 'hostnamectl' to identify the operating system versionAffected if The system is running openSUSE Leap 15.0 or SUSE Linux Enterprise 15
-
Inspect pam_access rule enforcementReview /etc/security/access.conf and test whether access rules are being applied by attempting access from an IP outside allowed ranges, or compare configuration against actual access behaviorAffected if Access control rules in access.conf appear to be ignored or are not restricting access as configured
The system is affected if it runs PAM version 1.3.0 on openSUSE Leap 15.0 or SLE 15 with pam_access module enabled, and access rules are being bypassed or not enforced.
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 dataApply the corrected SUSE patch for PAM 1.3.0 that fixes the pam_access variable issue and verify that access control rules are properly enforced after the fix.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-17953 — 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-2018-17953 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