CVE-2021-28979
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 · uneditedSafeNet KeySecure Management Console 8.12.0 is vulnerable to HTTP response splitting attacks. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability using specially-crafted URL to cause the server to return a split response, once the URL is clicked.
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 confidenceSafeNet KeySecure Management Console 8.12.0 fails to properly sanitize user-supplied input in URLs, allowing an attacker to inject carriage return (CR) and line feed (LF) characters. This enables HTTP response splitting, where the attacker can inject malicious headers or content by splitting a single HTTP response into multiple responses, potentially leading to cross-site scripting (XSS), cache poisoning, or session hijacking.
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<= 8.12.0CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 KeySecure installation and versionLocate the KeySecure installation directory or check the Management Console login page for the version number, typically displayed on the login screen or in the About/Help sectionAffected if The installed version is 8.12.0 or any version lower than 8.12.0
-
Confirm Management Console is accessibleAccess the Management Console web interface via HTTPS or HTTP on the configured port (default ports are typically 8089 or 8443)Affected if The Management Console is exposed and reachable on the network
-
Check URL parameter handlingAttempt to access a URL with CR (%0D) and LF (%0A) characters appended to a parameter value, for example: https://[host]/[endpoint]?param=test%0D%0AAffected if The application accepts and reflects CR/LF characters without validation, allowing response splitting
-
Review web server logs for CR/LF injection attemptsExamine KeySecure Management Console logs (typically stored in /var/log or the installation logs directory) for entries containing %0D, %0A, or literal CR/LF characters in request URLsAffected if Logs show evidence of CR/LF injection attempts or the application is processing such requests without rejection
Your environment is affected if SafeNet KeySecure Management Console version 8.12.0 or lower is installed and the web interface is accessible, since the vulnerability exists in these versions regardless of configuration.
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 dataImplement strict input validation to reject any request containing CR/LF characters in URL parameters. Additionally, ensure all user-supplied data is properly encoded before being used in HTTP headers or response bodies.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-28979 — 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-2021-28979 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