CVE-2018-6374
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 · uneditedThe GUI component (aka PulseUI) in Pulse Secure Desktop Linux clients before PULSE5.2R9.2 and 5.3.x before PULSE5.3R4.2 does not perform strict SSL Certificate Validation. This can lead to the manipulation of the Pulse Connection set.
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 confidenceThe PulseUI GUI component in Pulse Secure Desktop Linux clients before version PULSE5.2R9.2 and 5.3.x before PULSE5.3R4.2 fails to perform strict SSL certificate validation. This allows man-in-the-middle attackers to manipulate the Pulse Connection set by presenting invalid or forged SSL certificates.
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< 5.2r9.2< 5.3r4.2CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
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 if Pulse Secure Desktop client is installedLook for the pulse client binary or package. Common locations: /usr/local/pulse, /opt/pulse, or check for rpm/deb package with command 'rpm -qa | grep -i pulse' or 'dpkg -l | grep -i pulse'Affected if Pulse Secure Desktop client is not installed on the system
-
Determine installed Pulse Secure client versionRun command: 'pulse --version' or check package version with 'rpm -qi <pulse-package-name>' or 'dpkg -s <pulse-package-name>'Affected if Unable to determine version or client appears to be a version earlier than PULSE5.2R9.2 or between 5.3.0 and 5.3R4.1
-
Compare version against affected rangesReview the version number obtained. Affected if: version is < 5.2R9.2, OR version is 5.3.x where x < 4.2 (such as 5.3R4.1, 5.3R3, etc.)Affected if Installed version falls below 5.2R9.2 or is in the 5.3.x family before 5.3R4.2
-
Verify Linux platform is in useConfirm the operating system is Linux. This vulnerability specifically affects the Pulse Secure Desktop Linux client, not Windows or macOS versionsAffected if The vulnerable client is running on a Linux system
A user is affected if the Pulse Secure Desktop Linux client is installed with a version lower than 5.2R9.2 or in the 5.3.x range before 5.3R4.2, as these versions lack proper SSL certificate validation in the PulseUI component.
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 data5.2r9.25.3r4.2
Upgrade Pulse Secure Desktop Linux clients to PULSE5.2R9.2, PULSE5.3R4.2, or later versions which implement proper SSL certificate validation. Verify that certificate validation is enforced after upgrading.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-6374 — 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-2018-6374 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