CVE-2017-5638
Hp Server Automation 10.0.0 … 9.1.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2017-5638 is a critical-severity Improper Handling of Exceptional Conditions (CWE-755) vulnerability in Hp Server Automation. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, ranked in the top 0.0% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
The vulnerability CVE-2017-5638 resides in the Jakarta Multipart parser component of Apache Struts 2 versions 2.3.x prior to 2.3.32 and 2.5.x prior to 2.5.10.1. It arises from improper exception handling and error-message generation when processing file-upload requests, tracked as CWE-755, and carries a CVSS 3.1 base score of 9.8.
Unauthenticated remote attackers can exploit the flaw over the network by supplying a crafted Content-Type, Content-Disposition, or Content-Length HTTP header during a file-upload attempt, resulting in arbitrary command execution on the server with no user interaction required.
The issue was exploited in the wild in March 2017, including attacks that embedded a #cmd= string inside the Content-Type header. Multiple vendor advisories and security analyses reference the same attack pattern and affected Struts versions.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2018-0625
Vulnerability Data
The Jakarta Multipart parser in Apache Struts 2 2.3.x before 2.3.32 and 2.5.x before 2.5.10.1 has incorrect exception handling and error-message generation during file-upload attempts, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via a crafted Content-Type, Content-Disposition, or Content-Length…
more
HTTP header, as exploited in the wild in March 2017 with a Content-Type header containing a #cmd= string.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 03 November 2021
Related Threats
Threat-Actor AttributionAI
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Provides defined handling (alert and additional actions) for the exceptional condition of audit logging failure.
Supplies a concrete handling action (safe mode) for exceptional conditions, mitigating risks from improper or absent handling that could allow continued attacks.
By preparing users for contingency scenarios, the control promotes proper handling of exceptional conditions instead of default or unsafe behaviors.
An updated contingency plan defines current actions for exceptional conditions, reducing the window for attackers to exploit improper handling leading to system failure.
Procedures ensure proper handling of exceptional conditions to support effective incident response.
Incident response testing confirms proper handling of exceptional conditions to limit exploit impact.
Gives users guidance on incident handling, reducing improper handling of exceptional conditions that could stem from exploited weaknesses.
Enforces structured response to exceptional conditions so the system cannot remain in an unsafe state.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Documented operating procedures may specify exception handling but do not guarantee implementation.
Logging captures unhandled exceptions, aiding detection but not preventing the weakness.
Monitoring can surface unhandled exceptions but does not enforce proper handling.
Secure SDLC mandates exception-handling requirements and testing that directly prevent improper handling of exceptional conditions.
A.8.26 explicitly lists resilience against malicious attacks including SQL injections, input validation, error message handling, and several integrity/authorization requirements that address exceptional conditions in a minority of cases, but most CWE-755 instances (e.g. unhandled nulls, resource errors, unexpected states) fall outside its named topics.
A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles (fail securely, least privilege, defense-in-depth, distrust external input, assume-breach) plus design reviews that can catch and stop many but not all mishandlings of exceptional conditions before they reach production code; a bounded remainder (e.g. subtle runtime error paths, library-level faults, or post-review regressions) can still be present and exploitable.
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.