CVE-2018-6494
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 · uneditedRemote SQL Injection against the HP Service Manager Software Web Tier, version 9.30, 9.31, 9.32, 9.33, 9.34, 9.35, 9.40, 9.41, 9.50, 9.51, may lead to unauthorized disclosure of data.
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 confidenceRemote SQL injection vulnerability in HP Service Manager Software Web Tier allows attackers to inject malicious SQL queries through web-facing inputs, potentially exposing sensitive database contents.
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= 9.30= 9.31= 9.32= 9.33= 9.34= 9.35= 9.40= 9.41= 9.50= 9.51CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify Service Manager versionLocate the installed version of Microfocus Service Manager by checking the product version file, about page, or using the sm -version command if accessible through the server consoleAffected if The installed version matches 9.30, 9.31, 9.32, 9.33, 9.34, 9.35, 9.40, 9.41, 9.50, or 9.51
-
Determine if Web Tier is enabledCheck the Service Manager configuration for the Web Tier component status. Typically found in the SM web application server configuration or web.xml deployment descriptorAffected if Web Tier is enabled and accessible from the network
-
Verify web-facing input points existIdentify publicly accessible web endpoints that accept user input, such as login forms, search fields, or API endpoints exposed by the Service Manager web tierAffected if User-controllable inputs are reachable without authentication or with standard user credentials
-
Inspect web access logs for SQL injection patternsReview HTTP access logs from the web tier server for suspicious query patterns containing SQL keywords (SELECT, UNION, INSERT, DROP) in parameter values, especially in unauthenticated or user input fieldsAffected if Logs contain requests with SQL syntax in parameters or evidence of automated injection probing
-
Check for unusual database query patternsMonitor database audit logs or Service Manager application logs for unexpected or unauthorized database queries, particularly those extracting large datasets from sensitive tablesAffected if Database queries originate from web tier users that are unusually complex, retrieve sensitive tables, or occur outside normal application behavior
You are affected if the installed Service Manager version is one of the listed affected versions AND the Web Tier component is exposed to network access, regardless of whether exploitation signs are currently visible.
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 vendor patches or upgrade to a fixed version. Implement parameterized queries and input validation as compensating controls until patches can be deployed.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $8,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-6494 — 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-2018-6494 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