CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2017-12317

Use of Hard-coded Credentials

Published: Oct 22, 2017 | Modified: Apr 20, 2025
CVSS 3.x
6.7
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS 2.x
4.6 MEDIUM
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

The Cisco AMP For Endpoints application allows an authenticated, local attacker to access a static key value stored in the local application software. The vulnerability is due to the use of a static key value stored in the application used to encrypt the connector protection password. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by gaining local, administrative access to a Windows host and stopping the Cisco AMP for Endpoints service. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvg42904.

Weakness

The product contains hard-coded credentials, such as a password or cryptographic key.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 3.1(10) (including) 3.1(10) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 3.1(15) (including) 3.1(15) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.0(0) (including) 4.0(0) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.0(1) (including) 4.0(1) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.0(2) (including) 4.0(2) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.1(0) (including) 4.1(0) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.1(1) (including) 4.1(1) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.1(4) (including) 4.1(4) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.2(0) (including) 4.2(0) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.2(1) (including) 4.2(1) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.3(0) (including) 4.3(0) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.3(1) (including) 4.3(1) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.4(0) (including) 4.4(0) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.4(1) (including) 4.4(1) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.4(2) (including) 4.4(2) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 4.4(4) (including) 4.4(4) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.0(1) (including) 5.0(1) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.0(3) (including) 5.0(3) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.0(5) (including) 5.0(5) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.0(7) (including) 5.0(7) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.0(9) (including) 5.0(9) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.1(1) (including) 5.1(1) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.1(3) (including) 5.1(3) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.1(5) (including) 5.1(5) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.1(7) (including) 5.1(7) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.1(9) (including) 5.1(9) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.1(11) (including) 5.1(11) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 5.1(13) (including) 5.1(13) (including)
Advanced_malware_protection Cisco 6.0(1) (including) 6.0(1) (including)

Extended Description

There are two main variations:

Potential Mitigations

  • For outbound authentication: store passwords, keys, and other credentials outside of the code in a strongly-protected, encrypted configuration file or database that is protected from access by all outsiders, including other local users on the same system. Properly protect the key (CWE-320). If you cannot use encryption to protect the file, then make sure that the permissions are as restrictive as possible [REF-7].
  • In Windows environments, the Encrypted File System (EFS) may provide some protection.
  • For inbound authentication using passwords: apply strong one-way hashes to passwords and store those hashes in a configuration file or database with appropriate access control. That way, theft of the file/database still requires the attacker to try to crack the password. When handling an incoming password during authentication, take the hash of the password and compare it to the saved hash.
  • Use randomly assigned salts for each separate hash that is generated. This increases the amount of computation that an attacker needs to conduct a brute-force attack, possibly limiting the effectiveness of the rainbow table method.
  • For front-end to back-end connections: Three solutions are possible, although none are complete.

References