Unity ConnectionApplication · Cisco
CVE-2019-1685
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 vulnerability in the Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) single sign-on (SSO) interface of Cisco Unity Connection could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct a cross-site scripting (XSS) attack against a user of the interface of an affected device. The vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of user-supplied input by the interface of an affected device. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by persuading a user of the interface to click a crafted link. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary script code in the context of the affected interface or access sensitive, browser-based information. Version 12.5 is affected.
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 confidenceCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) single sign-on interface of Cisco Unity Connection version 12.5. The interface insufficiently validates user-supplied input, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to inject malicious script via crafted links that execute in the context of the affected interface.
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
Unity ConnectionApplication
= 12.5CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/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.
-
Verify Cisco Unity Connection is installedCheck system inventory or running processes for Cisco Unity Connection softwareAffected if The software is not present on the system, the vulnerability does not apply
-
Confirm installed version is 12.5Use the product's administrative interface or command line tools to query the exact version number, then compare to the affected range (12.5)Affected if The installed version is not 12.5, this specific CVE does not apply
-
Determine if SAML SSO interface is accessibleCheck the Unity Connection administration or web interface for SAML single sign-on configuration status and accessibilityAffected if SAML SSO is not enabled or the interface is not exposed, the attack surface for this XSS vulnerability does not exist
You are affected if Cisco Unity Connection version 12.5 is installed and the SAML SSO interface is enabled and accessible to users or attackers.
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 Cisco security patches for CVE-2019-1685 when available; until then, user awareness training to avoid clicking untrusted links in the SAML SSO context is recommended.
Fix this in Unity Connection
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,472.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-1685 — 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-2019-1685 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