CVE-2017-1239 in Quality Manager
Summary
by MITRE
IBM Quality Manager (RQM) 5.0.x and 6.0 through 6.0.5 could reveal sensitive information in HTTP 500 Internal Server Error responses. IBM X-Force ID: 124357.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 04/03/2023
IBM Quality Manager RQM versions 5.0.x through 6.0.5 suffered from a sensitive data exposure vulnerability that manifested through improper error handling mechanisms. The flaw occurred when the application encountered internal processing errors, resulting in HTTP 500 Internal Server Error responses that inadvertently disclosed confidential system information to unauthorized parties. This vulnerability falls under CWE-209, which specifically addresses the exposure of sensitive information through error messages, representing a fundamental security weakness in the application's defensive programming practices. The improper error handling allowed attackers to glean potentially valuable information about the underlying system architecture, including file paths, database configurations, and internal component structures that should remain hidden from external observation.
The technical implementation of this vulnerability stemmed from the application's failure to sanitize error responses before transmitting them to client systems. When processing requests that triggered internal server failures, RQM did not adequately filter or abstract the error details, leading to the exposure of stack traces, system resource locations, and potentially sensitive operational parameters. This behavior aligns with ATT&CK technique T1211, which involves the exploitation of information disclosure vulnerabilities to gather intelligence about target systems. The vulnerability was particularly concerning because it affected multiple versions within the 5.0.x and 6.0.x release lines, indicating a systemic flaw in the error handling implementation rather than an isolated incident.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extended beyond simple information disclosure, as the leaked data could serve as a foundation for more sophisticated attacks. An attacker who successfully exploited this weakness could use the exposed information to plan targeted attacks against specific system components, potentially leading to privilege escalation or further system compromise. The disclosure of internal system details made it significantly easier for threat actors to identify potential attack vectors and understand the application's operational environment. This vulnerability particularly affected organizations using IBM Quality Manager for quality assurance and testing processes, where the exposure of sensitive information could compromise the integrity of testing environments and potentially impact production systems.
Organizations should have implemented immediate mitigations including comprehensive error handling improvements, proper input validation, and the implementation of generic error messages that do not expose system internals. The remediation process required updating to patched versions of IBM Quality Manager or implementing custom error handling mechanisms that abstracted sensitive information from error responses. Security teams should have conducted thorough vulnerability assessments to identify any other applications within their environment that might exhibit similar error handling weaknesses. This vulnerability highlighted the importance of following secure coding practices and implementing proper error management as outlined in industry standards such as OWASP Top Ten and NIST Cybersecurity Framework, which emphasize the critical nature of preventing information leakage through error responses and maintaining system confidentiality even during failure conditions.