CVE-2021-1579
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 an API endpoint of Cisco Application Policy Infrastructure Controller (APIC) and Cisco Cloud Application Policy Infrastructure Controller (Cloud APIC) could allow an authenticated, remote attacker with Administrator read-only credentials to elevate privileges on an affected system. This vulnerability is due to an insufficient role-based access control (RBAC). An attacker with Administrator read-only credentials could exploit this vulnerability by sending a specific API request using an app with admin write credentials. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to elevate privileges to Administrator with write privileges on the affected device.
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 analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
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< 3.2\(10f\)>= 4.0, < 4.2\(7l\)>= 5.0, < 5.2\(2f\)< 3.2\(10f\)>= 4.0, < 4.2\(7l\)>= 5.0, < 5.2\(2f\)CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
dbcve · scoped3.24.25.2
Upgrade to 5.2(2f) or later (or the appropriate fixed version for your branch: 3.2(10f)+, 4.2(7l)+, or 5.2(2f)+)
- 1. Identify the currently installed version of Cisco Application Policy Infrastructure Controller (APIC) or Cloud APIC
- 2. Based on current version, determine the minimum fixed release to upgrade to: if version < 3.2, upgrade to 3.2(10f) or later; if version >= 4.0 but < 4.2, upgrade to 4.2(7l) or later; if version >= 5.0 but < 5.2, upgrade to 5.2(2f) or later
- 3. Review Cisco APIC upgrade documentation and release notes for upgrade procedures specific to your deployment type
- 4. Before upgrading in production, test the upgrade in a staging environment to verify compatibility with existing configurations
- 5. Create a complete backup of the current APIC configuration
- 6. Perform the upgrade following Cisco's recommended upgrade path and maintenance window procedures
- 7. After upgrade, verify the RBAC functionality and confirm the patch is applied by checking the system version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-1579 — 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-2021-1579 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