CVE-2018-8059
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 Djelibeybi configuration examples for use of NGINX in SUSE Portus 2.3, when applied to certain configurations involving Docker Compose, have a Missing SSL Certificate Validation issue because no proxy_ssl_* directives are used.
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 confidenceThe vulnerability exists in NGINX configuration examples for SUSE Portus 2.3 when deployed with Docker Compose. The configurations lack proxy_ssl_* directives, which means NGINX does not validate SSL certificates when proxying requests to upstream HTTPS services. This allows potential man-in-the-middle attacks where an attacker could impersonate the upstream server.
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= 2.3.0CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/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.
-
Identify SUSE Portus installation and versionCheck if Portus version 2.3.0 is deployed in your environment by examining the Docker Compose files, container labels, or the Portus web interface version displayAffected if Portus version 2.3.0 is confirmed to be running
-
Locate NGINX reverse proxy configurationFind NGINX configuration files used to proxy requests to Portus; typical locations include /etc/nginx/conf.d/, /etc/nginx/sites-enabled/, or mounted Docker volumes for the nginx serviceAffected if NGINX is configured as a reverse proxy in front of Portus
-
Check for proxy_ssl_verify directiveExamine the NGINX server block that proxies to the Portus upstream and search for the 'proxy_ssl_verify' directiveAffected if The directive is absent from the proxy configuration block (SSL verification is not explicitly enabled)
-
Check for proxy_ssl_trusted_certificate directiveIn the same NGINX proxy configuration block, search for 'proxy_ssl_trusted_certificate' or 'proxy_ssl_verify_depth' directives that specify trusted CA certificatesAffected if These directives are not configured, meaning no trusted CA certificate is specified for upstream SSL validation
-
Determine if upstream uses HTTPSIn the NGINX proxy configuration, check the 'proxy_pass' directive to confirm the upstream URL scheme is HTTPS (for example, 'https://backend')Affected if The upstream is accessed via HTTPS and the SSL validation directives are missing
You are affected if you are running SUSE Portus 2.3.0 with NGINX as a reverse proxy to HTTPS upstreams and the NGINX configuration lacks both proxy_ssl_verify and proxy_ssl_trusted_certificate directives.
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 dataAdd proxy_ssl_verify, proxy_ssl_trusted_certificate, and related proxy_ssl_* directives to enable proper SSL certificate validation in the NGINX reverse proxy configuration.
- Consultation2.0 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 $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-8059 — 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-2018-8059 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