Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 16.35% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2015
CVE-2015-3185High confidence
Affected product: security vulnerability
Unknown · Unknown
4.3MediumCVSS 2.0
Scheduled
Patch availableMedium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Unknown Unknown and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Distribution package intelligence
4 package statesRelease-specific package status
Debian findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Repository candidate not checked
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debian trixietrixie · source | apache2 | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 2.4.16-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | apache2 | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 2.4.16-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | apache2 | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 2.4.16-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | apache2 | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 2.4.16-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
Direct vendor intelligence
0 current · 1 archivedAuthoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories
Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.
CVE-2015-3185 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securityhttpd: ap_some_auth_required() does not properly indicate authenticated request in 2.4No longer in the provider’s current catalogue
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- httpd24 as a component of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Web Server 3
- Summary
- It was discovered that in httpd 2.4, the internal API function ap_some_auth_required() could incorrectly indicate that a request was authenticated even when no authentication was used. An httpd module using this API function could consequently allow access that should have been denied.
- Remediation
- For details on how to apply this update, which includes the changes described in this advisory, refer to: https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258 After installing the updated packages, the httpd daemon will be restarted automatically. For the update to take effect, all services linked to the OpenSSL library must be restarted, or the system rebooted.
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Patch available01
What, why and how
The ap_some_auth_required function in server/request.c in the Apache HTTP Server 2.4.x before 2.4.14 does not consider that a Require directive may be associated with an authorization setting rather than an authentication setting, which allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions in opportunistic circumstances by leveraging the presence of a module that relies on the 2.2 API behavior.
What
The ap_some_auth_required function in server/request.c in the Apache HTTP Server 2.4.x before 2.4.14 does not consider that a Require directive may be associated with an authorization setting rather than an authentication setting, which allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions in opportunistic circumstances by leveraging the presence of a module that relies on the 2.2 API behavior.
Why
The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.
How
An attacker operating through the affected interface may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
The ap_some_auth_required function in server/request.c in the Apache HTTP Server 2.4.x before 2.4.14 does not consider that a Require directive may be associated with an authorization setting rather than an authentication setting, which allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions in opportunistic circumstances by leveraging the presence of a module that relies on the 2.2 API behavior.
Why
The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.
How
An attacker operating through the affected interface may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- the affected interface → vulnerable operation → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Unspecified
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- Not stated in the selected CVSS metric
- Attack complexity
- Not stated in the selected CVSS metric
- Security boundary
- Not stated in the selected CVSS metric
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-264 ↗
CWE-264. Open the MITRE definition for the exact weakness description.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Patch available
- Affected
- n/a
- Action
- Apply the fixed release for the affected product branch as recorded by Red Hat Product Security. Validate the exact product and build in the linked advisory before deployment.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 20 Jul 2015 · Last source change 6 Aug 2024, 05:39 UTC · CWE-264
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-09-01
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2015-3255
Product sourceUnavailable
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceNIST NVD
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment
Missing structured fields: affected product. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- Vendor guidanceAuthoritative vendor guidance changed from remediation: access.redhat.com/CVE-2015-3185 to advisory no longer present in the provider's current catalogue.Red Hat Product Security ↗
- Before
- remediation: access.redhat.com/CVE-2015-3185
- After
- advisory no longer present in the provider's current catalogue
- Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.Red Hat Product Security ↗
- Before
- n/a · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- After
- n/a · Fixed: For details on how to apply this update, which includes the changes described in this advisory, refer to: https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258 After installing the updated packages, the httpd daemon will be restarted automatically. For the update to take effect, all services linked to the OpenSSL library must be restarted, or the system rebooted.
- Remediation statusRemediation status changed from Awaiting fix to Patch available.Red Hat Product Security ↗
- Before
- Awaiting fix
- After
- Patch available
- ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2015-3255 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.ENISA EUVD ↗
- Before
- not recorded
- After
- {"euvdId":"EUVD-2015-3255"}
- Vendor guidanceAuthoritative vendor guidance changed: added vendor advisory: httpd.apache.org/vulnerabilities_24.html; removed vendor advisory: access.redhat.com/RHSA-2017:2708; removed vendor advisory: access.redhat.com/RHSA-2017:2709; 10 further removals.httpd.apache.org ↗
- Before
- vendor advisory: access.redhat.com/RHSA-2017:2708 · vendor advisory: access.redhat.com/RHSA-2017:2709 · vendor advisory: access.redhat.com/RHSA-2017:2710 · 9 more references
- After
- vendor advisory: httpd.apache.org/vulnerabilities_24.html
- SeveritySeverity changed from Unknown to Medium.NIST NVD ↗
- Before
- Unknown
- After
- Medium
- CVSS scoreCVSS score changed from not recorded to 4.3 (CVSS 2.0 · NIST NVD · AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N).NIST NVD ↗
- Before
- not recorded
- After
- 4.3 (CVSS 2.0 · NIST NVD · AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N)
- Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.CNA ↗
CVE published
Fixed release recorded from official guidance
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.