CVE-2021-1566
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 Cisco Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) for Endpoints integration of Cisco AsyncOS for Cisco Email Security Appliance (ESA) and Cisco Web Security Appliance (WSA) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to intercept traffic between an affected device and the AMP servers. This vulnerability is due to improper certificate validation when an affected device establishes TLS connections. A man-in-the-middle attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted TLS packet to an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to spoof a trusted host and then extract sensitive information or alter certain API requests.
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 confidenceImproper TLS certificate validation in Cisco ESA and WSA devices when connecting to AMP servers allows a remote, unauthenticated attacker to perform man-in-the-middle attacks, potentially intercepting sensitive information or altering API requests between the affected device and AMP infrastructure.
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 dataall versions< 12.5.3-035>= 13.0, < 13.0.0-030>= 13.5, < 13.5.3-010< 11.8.3-021>= 12.0.0, < 12.0.3-005>= 12.5.0, < 12.5.1-043all versionsCVSS 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
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 the device modelCheck whether the device is a Cisco Email Security Appliance (ESA) or Cisco Web Security Appliance (WSA). This can be done via the admin web interface under System Administration > Product Identification, or via CLI command 'show version'.Affected if If the device is an ESA or WSA, proceed to next checks.
-
Determine the installed firmware versionFor ESA: check via the web interface under Help and Tutorials > About or CLI command 'show version'. For WSA (AsyncOS): use CLI command 'show version' or web interface under System Administration > Software Upgrade. Compare the version number to the affected ranges: AsyncOS < 12.5.3-035; >= 13.0.0, < 13.0.0-030; >= 13.5.0, < 13.5.3-010; < 11.8.3-021; >= 12.0.0, < 12.0.3-005; >= 12.5.0, < 12.5.1-043. For ESA, all versions are affected.Affected if If the firmware version falls within any of the affected ranges, or if the device is ESA with any version, the vulnerability is potentially present.
-
Verify AMP feature is enabledCheck if Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is configured on the device. For ESA: go to Security Services > IronPort Email Encryption (or AMP in newer versions) in the web interface, or use CLI command 'ampconfig'. For WSA: navigate to Security Services > Advanced Malware Protection in the web interface, or use CLI command 'amp'.Affected if If AMP is not enabled or configured, the vulnerability may not be exploitable as the device is not connecting to AMP servers.
-
Inspect TLS certificate verification settings for AMPReview the AMP integration configuration to determine if TLS certificate validation is properly enforced. For ESA: check under the AMP or encryption settings in the web interface. For WSA: check under Security Services > Advanced Malware Protection > AMP Configuration. Look for settings related to TLS/SSL certificate verification or certificate validation for AMP cloud connections.Affected if If TLS certificate verification is disabled, set to permissive, or not explicitly enabled in the AMP configuration, the device is vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks.
The environment is affected if the device is a Cisco ESA (any version) or WSA with an affected AsyncOS version, and AMP is enabled with TLS certificate verification disabled or improperly configured.
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 data11.8.3-02112.0.3-00512.5.1-043
Apply the appropriate Cisco firmware update for ESA/WSA that addresses proper certificate validation, or ensure TLS certificate verification is properly configured in the AMP integration settings.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,488.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-1566 — 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-2021-1566 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