Cisco Systems, a cornerstone of the global networking infrastructure, underpins a significant portion of the internet and enterprise networks worldwide. As a dominant player in the technology sector, the security of its software is of paramount importance. However, like any large technology vendor, Cisco faces the continuous challenge of identifying and mitigating software vulnerabilities. This article examines the evolution of Cisco’s software vulnerabilities and its patching practices over the past decade, aiming to provide a nuanced perspective on whether the company’s security posture is improving, declining, or remaining consistent in the face of an ever-evolving threat landscape.
The Vulnerability Landscape: A Look Through Time
To understand the current state of Cisco’s security, it is crucial to examine its history of reported vulnerabilities. Looking back at the period between 2015 and 2020 provides a valuable baseline. In 2015, a high-severity vulnerability (CVE-2015-0646) was identified in Cisco IOS Software 1. This flaw, a TCP memory leak during the three-way handshake process, could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to exhaust memory resources, leading to a device reload and a denial of service 1. The criticality of this vulnerability in a core networking component like TCP underscores the inherent complexities in developing and maintaining secure network operating systems. The potential for remote exploitation by unauthenticated attackers made it a significant risk, requiring users to apply the vendor-supplied patch to mitigate the threat 1.
Moving into 2020, a cluster of vulnerabilities known as “CDPwn” was discovered in the Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP) implementation across IOS and IXOS devices 2. These vulnerabilities (CVE-2020-3110, CVE-2020-3111, CVE-2020-3118, CVE-2020-3119, CVE-2020-3120) could lead to remote code execution and denial of service 2. While exploitation required the attacker to be on the same network segment, the fact that these flaws existed in a fundamental network management protocol raised concerns about internal network security 2. CDP’s common use for device discovery and configuration makes vulnerabilities within it a potential pathway for attackers already inside an organization’s network to gain further access or disrupt operations 2. The collective naming of these vulnerabilities as “CDPwn” suggests a widespread issue in the implementation of this protocol across multiple Cisco products 2.
Earlier in 2015, multiple vulnerabilities were also addressed in Cisco ASA software 3. These flaws in the DNS, DHCP, and IKE components could potentially allow a remote attacker to cause a denial-of-service condition 3. Given that ASA devices are critical security appliances, such vulnerabilities could have broad implications for network protection and availability 3. The fact that these vulnerabilities affected core services like DNS, DHCP, and IKE, which are essential for network communication and authentication, highlights the potential for significant disruption if exploited. The recommendation from US-CERT to review the Cisco security advisories and apply the necessary updates further emphasizes the seriousness of these issues 3.
Also in 2015, a remote file-overwrite vulnerability was patched in Cisco IMC Supervisor and UCS Director software 4. This flaw, stemming from incomplete input sanitization in JavaServer Pages (JSP), could have allowed an unauthenticated remote attacker to overwrite arbitrary files on the system, potentially leading to system instability 4. Vulnerabilities in management interfaces like IMC Supervisor and UCS Director are significant because they can provide attackers with control over the underlying systems, even if the core networking functions are secure 4. The issue of incomplete input sanitization in JSP points to the ongoing need for robust secure coding practices in web-based management tools.
Beyond these specific examples, the period between 2015 and 2020 saw various other bugs and vulnerabilities, including those related to the widely used OpenSSL library and other third-party software integrated into Cisco products 2. Cisco acknowledged the impact of OpenSSL vulnerabilities, which could affect features like SSLVPN and HTTPS client functionality 5. The reliance on third-party components means that Cisco’s security posture is also dependent on the security practices of its suppliers. In some instances, for vulnerabilities in third-party software affecting end-of-life products, Cisco made a business decision not to issue upgrades 7, which could leave users of those older devices exposed.
Moving to more recent times, late 2024 and early 2025 saw the disclosure of several critical vulnerabilities. One of the most severe was CVE-2024-20418, affecting Cisco’s Ultra-Reliable Wireless Backhaul (URWB) access points 8. With a maximum CVSS score of 10.0, this vulnerability allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges by sending crafted HTTP requests to the web-based management interface 8. Such a high severity rating indicates a critical flaw with the potential for complete system compromise, especially concerning given the use of these devices in industrial automation 8. While Cisco’s Product Security Incident Response Team (PSIRT) had not found evidence of active exploitation at the time of disclosure 9, the severity of the vulnerability makes it a significant threat.
Two critical vulnerabilities, CVE-2025-20124 and CVE-2025-20125, were also discovered in Cisco’s Identity Services Engine (ISE) 10. These flaws could allow authenticated remote attackers with read-only administrative privileges to execute arbitrary commands as root and bypass authorization on affected devices due to insecure deserialization of Java byte streams and a lack of authorization in a specific API 10. Given that ISE is a crucial component for network access control, these vulnerabilities could have a wide-ranging impact on network security policies 10. The fact that even attackers with limited administrative rights could gain root access highlights a significant flaw in the security architecture of this product.
Another critical vulnerability, CVE-2025-20156, was found in Cisco Meeting Management 11. This flaw, rated 9.9, could allow a remote, authenticated attacker with low privileges to escalate to administrator on affected devices due to improper authorization for REST API users 11. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized control over video conferencing infrastructure 11. The similarity to the ISE vulnerabilities in involving privilege escalation due to authorization issues suggests a potential pattern in security weaknesses within Cisco’s software development.
A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability, CVE-2024-20514, was identified in the web-based management interface of Cisco Evolved Programmable Network Manager (EPNM) and Cisco Prime Infrastructure 12. This flaw could allow a remote attacker with low-privileged access to inject malicious code that would be executed when another user views the affected interface 12. While XSS vulnerabilities might be considered less severe than remote code execution, they can still lead to significant security breaches through compromised user sessions and access to sensitive browser-based information 12. The continued presence of XSS vulnerabilities in web-based management interfaces suggests an ongoing challenge in ensuring proper input validation.
Furthermore, a command injection vulnerability (CVE-2023-20118) in Cisco Small Business RV Series routers was added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog 13. This flaw allows an authenticated remote attacker to gain root-level privileges and access unauthorized data but remains unpatched because the affected routers have reached their end-of-life status 13. The inclusion in CISA’s catalog indicates active exploitation in the wild, making it a significant concern for users still operating these end-of-life devices 13. Cisco’s policy of not patching end-of-life products creates a known security risk for its customers.
CISA also issued an alarm regarding the active exploitation of several flaws, including this Cisco vulnerability, underscoring the real-world impact of these security weaknesses 13. This highlights that Cisco vulnerabilities are not merely theoretical risks but are actively being targeted by malicious actors. Additionally, Cisco’s threat intelligence group, Talos, reported a significant number of vulnerabilities in Wavlink AC3000 routers in early 2025 14. While not Cisco products, this demonstrates the broad scope of Talos’s vulnerability research and the continued presence of security flaws in networking equipment from various vendors. The sheer volume of vulnerabilities found by Talos in a single vendor’s product raises broader questions about security practices in the industry.
Transparency and Disclosure: Evolving Practices
Cisco has made efforts to improve its transparency regarding security vulnerabilities. In 2015, Cisco announced significant improvements to its security vulnerability disclosure format 15. These enhancements included consolidating advisories for all severity levels under a single Cisco Security Advisory, replacing the previous system of separate advisories and alerts 15. Cisco also introduced the Security Impact Rating (SIR) to simplify the categorization of vulnerabilities based on severity 15. The look and feel of the advisories were enhanced, and search functionality was improved to allow customers to filter by various criteria such as SIR, CVSS score, affected products, and CVE IDs 15. Furthermore, Cisco began providing security advisories in the Common Vulnerability Reporting Framework (CVRF) format, a machine-readable standard that facilitates the automation of vulnerability management processes 15. New RSS feeds were also introduced for both CVRF and OVAL (Open Vulnerability and Assessment Language) content, allowing customers to subscribe to receive updates on security vulnerabilities and definitions for Cisco IOS Software 15. These improvements aimed to provide customers with more consistent, transparent, and easily accessible information about security vulnerabilities in Cisco products, enabling them to assess and mitigate risks more effectively.
Cisco also has a Vendor Vulnerability Reporting and Disclosure Policy that outlines how the company handles vulnerabilities discovered in non-Cisco products and services 16. This policy includes a 90-day disclosure window and outlines the steps Cisco takes to contact vendors, share vulnerability information, and publicly disclose findings if vendors are unresponsive 16. This commitment to responsible disclosure extends beyond Cisco’s own products, aiming to improve the security of the broader technology ecosystem 16. Cisco’s threat intelligence group, Talos, also adheres to a Responsible Disclosure Policy with a similar 90-day window and involves the Carnegie Mellon Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) for unresponsive vendors 17. This consistent approach across Cisco’s security efforts underscores the company’s commitment to timely and ethical vulnerability disclosure. Furthermore, Cisco operates a bug bounty program on Bugcrowd for its operational infrastructure, inviting security researchers to responsibly disclose any vulnerabilities they discover 18. This proactive engagement with the security research community helps Cisco identify and address potential weaknesses in its own systems.
The Patching Evolution: Adapting to Modern Challenges
Recognizing the challenges that enterprises face in managing software updates across a large number of devices, Cisco has focused on “Accelerate and Simplify” as guiding principles in the design of new software image upgrade and patching solutions 19. This includes advancements in three key areas: Upgrade Automation at Scale, In-Service Software Upgrade (ISSU), and Hot Patching Micro Images 19. Cisco offers network management and automation solutions like Cisco DNA Center and Cisco vManage that allow customers to automate the process of downloading and deploying software upgrades across their networks 19. The Software Image Management (SWIM) application in Cisco DNA Center, for example, can automate the download of recommended images, designate devices for upgrades, and run pre- and post-upgrade diagnostics 19. This automation can significantly reduce the time and effort required for large-scale upgrades.
For platforms with redundancy, Cisco offers In-Service Software Upgrade (ISSU) capabilities, which allow customers to perform image upgrades without any disruption or traffic loss 19. ISSU orchestrates the upgrade on standby and active processors sequentially, ensuring continuous operation 19. This is particularly important for mission-critical environments where downtime is unacceptable. Furthermore, Cisco has introduced the concept of Hot Patching Micro Images for critical bug or security fixes 19. Traditionally, addressing such issues required a full software image upgrade, which could be time-consuming and disruptive. Hot patching allows customers to install small micro images containing only the necessary code for the fix, often in a fraction of a second and without requiring a system reload 19. This significantly speeds up the process of applying critical security patches and reduces the potential for network disruption. These advancements, particularly hot patching, represent a significant step forward in Cisco’s ability to help customers address critical vulnerabilities quickly and efficiently. Cisco DNA Center also plays a role in recommending software versions and patches to customers based on their network environment and identified security vulnerabilities 19.
While Cisco has developed these advanced patching mechanisms, the fundamental challenges of patch management remain. These include accurately discovering all assets on the network, performing risk analysis to prioritize patching efforts, thoroughly testing patches before deployment to avoid instability, and establishing a robust remediation process 20. Cisco provides tools like the Cisco IOS Software Checker to help customers identify security advisories that impact their specific software releases and determine the earliest releases that contain fixes 20. This tool assists customers in assessing their vulnerability exposure and planning necessary upgrades. The importance of having a comprehensive patch management policy and process in place cannot be overstated 20.
Expert Analysis: Perspectives from the Cybersecurity Community
Cisco is widely recognized as a leading cybersecurity company, offering a comprehensive portfolio of security solutions 22. A key component of its security capabilities is Cisco Talos, a renowned threat intelligence team that plays a crucial role in identifying and analyzing cyber threats, including vulnerabilities in software 23. Talos continuously monitors the global threat landscape, analyzing vast amounts of data to identify potential attacks and vulnerabilities before they can be exploited 23. This proactive threat intelligence is integrated into Cisco’s security products, providing customers with real-time protection and updates 23. Cisco also offers tools like the Cisco Security Resilience Assessment to help organizations understand their overall security posture, including identifying gaps in their security programs across various domains 24. Furthermore, Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) provides capabilities for continuous endpoint security posture analysis, allowing organizations to assess the trustworthiness of devices accessing their networks 25.
The cybersecurity industry as a whole has seen a record number of reported vulnerabilities in recent years 26. Research from Kenna Security, now part of Cisco, highlights the importance of prioritizing the remediation of high-risk vulnerabilities, particularly those with publicly available exploit code, as this can significantly reduce an organization’s likelihood of being breached 27. Their analysis suggests that focusing on exploitability is a more effective approach than solely relying on CVSS scores for prioritization 27. Cisco’s own vulnerability management approach leverages data from various sources, including MITRE, NVD, and its own research teams, to provide customers with a risk-based assessment of vulnerabilities, enabling them to focus on the most critical threats 26. The effectiveness of patch management in mitigating security risks is widely acknowledged in the cybersecurity community 28. Cisco’s regular release of security patches, even for critical vulnerabilities affecting both software and hardware, is seen as a crucial aspect of maintaining a strong security posture 28.
Customer Corner: Voices from the Field
While Cisco has made advancements in its patching processes, customer feedback reveals ongoing challenges. Some customers still rely on manual processes to identify and apply patches, highlighting a potential need for greater adoption of Cisco’s automation tools 30. The complexity of large network environments can also make automated patching challenging to implement fully 19. One customer recounted an auditor finding a significantly outdated firmware version on a Cisco router, and the ISP responsible for its maintenance cited a cautious approach to updates due to potential interoperability issues and the need for thorough testing 31. This illustrates the real-world balancing act that IT professionals face between applying security updates promptly and ensuring the stability of their network environments.
Frustration with Cisco’s support policies regarding access to software updates without a valid support contract has also been voiced by customers 32. This can be a particular issue for organizations using older or end-of-life equipment that may still be vulnerable to known exploits. Customer reviews of Cisco products offer a mixed perspective. While some praise the reliability, security features, and support offered by Cisco 33, others point to the complexity of configuration, high costs, and potential issues with the update process and the reliability of certain product lines 33. For example, some users have reported difficulties with upgrading Cisco Unified Contact Center and have noted inconsistencies across different components 35. The perception of Cisco’s licensing model as cumbersome and expensive is also a recurring theme in customer feedback 36.
Answering the Question: Is Cisco Getting Worse?
Assessing whether Cisco’s security posture is deteriorating is a complex undertaking. The analysis of historical and recent vulnerability data indicates a consistent stream of reported vulnerabilities, which is not uncommon for a software vendor of Cisco’s size and complexity. There is no clear evidence of a dramatic surge in the severity or frequency of critical vulnerabilities in recent times compared to the past decade. The types of vulnerabilities identified, such as command injection, privilege escalation, and cross-site scripting, have been prevalent throughout the examined period.
Cisco has made significant strides in improving its transparency by enhancing its vulnerability disclosure policies and providing more accessible and machine-readable information. Furthermore, the company has invested in developing more advanced patching mechanisms, including hot patching and automation tools integrated into platforms like DNA Center. These advancements are aimed at simplifying and accelerating the process of applying security updates, particularly for enterprise customers managing large and intricate networks.
The cybersecurity community recognizes Cisco’s substantial role in threat intelligence through Cisco Talos and its commitment to addressing vulnerabilities using a risk-based approach. This focus on prioritizing high-risk vulnerabilities aligns with industry best practices.
However, customer feedback reveals ongoing challenges in patch management, with some organizations still relying on manual processes and facing complexities in large-scale deployments. Concerns also persist regarding Cisco’s support policies for software updates, particularly for customers without active support contracts or those using end-of-life equipment. The issue of unpatched vulnerabilities in end-of-life devices remains a valid concern.
Therefore, it is unlikely that Cisco’s security posture is simply “getting worse.” Instead, it is a dynamic situation. While vulnerabilities continue to be discovered, Cisco has also demonstrated a commitment to improving its security practices in terms of disclosure and patching capabilities. The effectiveness of these improvements in enhancing the overall security of Cisco’s user base depends heavily on the customers’ ability and willingness to adopt the provided tools and implement robust patch management strategies. The ever-evolving threat landscape necessitates continuous adaptation and innovation from both Cisco and its customers to maintain a strong security posture.
Staying Secure: Best Practices for Cisco Users
To maintain the security of their Cisco devices, users should adhere to several best practices:
- Implement a rigorous schedule for updating software and firmware to the latest versions, with a particular focus on applying security patches promptly 28.
- Subscribe to Cisco’s security advisories and regularly review them to understand potential risks and the recommended actions 15.
- Leverage Cisco’s automated patching and update tools, such as those available through Cisco DNA Center or Cisco vManage, whenever feasible to streamline the update process 19.
- Establish and enforce strong network security practices, including the use of strong, unique passwords, multi-factor authentication for administrative access, and implementing strict access control lists and network segmentation to limit the potential impact of security breaches 25.
- Develop and maintain a comprehensive patch management policy that includes regular vulnerability scanning, risk assessment to prioritize patching efforts, and defined timelines for applying updates 20.
- Carefully evaluate the security risks associated with using end-of-life Cisco devices and plan for timely upgrades or replacements to ensure continued access to security updates and support 7.
- Organizations with limited in-house security expertise should consider engaging with managed security service providers or cybersecurity consultants to assist with vulnerability management and patching processes 23.
Conclusion
In conclusion, assessing Cisco’s security posture is not a straightforward task. While the company continues to face the challenge of software vulnerabilities, as evidenced by both historical and recent disclosures, it has also demonstrated a commitment to improving its transparency, disclosure practices, and patching capabilities. The introduction of advanced patching mechanisms and the proactive threat intelligence provided by Cisco Talos are significant steps in the right direction. However, the ultimate security of Cisco’s products also relies heavily on its customers actively implementing timely updates and adopting robust security practices. The ongoing battle between security vendors and threat actors necessitates continuous vigilance, adaptation, and collaboration to ensure a secure networking environment for all users of Cisco technology.
Table 1: Examples of Significant Cisco Vulnerabilities (2015-2025)
| CVE ID | Description of Vulnerability | Report Date (Year-Month) | CVSS Score (Base Score) | Affected Product(s) | Brief Significance |
| CVE-2015-0646 | TCP Memory Leak DoS | 2015-03 | 7.5 (v3) | IOS Software | Denial of Service |
| CVE-2020-3119 | Cisco Discovery Protocol Remote Code Execution | 2020-02 | 8.8 | NX-OS Software | Remote Code Execution |
| CVE-2015-0286 et al. | OpenSSL Vulnerabilities | 2015-03 | Various | IOS | Potential Remote Code Execution, Information Disclosure |
| CVE-2024-20418 | Unauthenticated Root Command Execution | 2024-11 | 10.0 | URWB Access Points | Root Command Execution |
| CVE-2025-20124 | ISE Authenticated Root Command Execution | 2025-02 | 9.9 | Identity Services Engine (ISE) | Root Command Execution |
| CVE-2025-20156 | Meeting Management Privilege Escalation | 2025-01 | 9.9 | Meeting Management | Privilege Escalation to Admin |
| CVE-2024-20514 | EPNM/Prime Infrastructure Stored XSS | 2024-11 | 5.4 | EPNM, Prime Infrastructure | Cross-Site Scripting |
| CVE-2023-20118 | Small Business RV Series Command Injection | 2023 | 6.5 | Small Business RV Series Routers | Root-Level Privileges (Unpatched EOL) |
Table 2: Cisco’s Evolution in Vulnerability Disclosure and Patching
| Year | Key Development/Initiative | Brief Description/Significance | Snippet(s) Reference |
| 2015 | Improvements to Security Vulnerability Disclosures | Consolidated advisories, introduced SIR, enhanced format and search, provided CVRF and OVAL feeds. | 15 |
| 2016 | Talos Responsible Disclosure Policy Update | Aligned with a 90-day disclosure window, involves CERT for unresponsive vendors. | 17 |
| Ongoing | Bug Bounty Program | Encourages external researchers to report vulnerabilities in Cisco’s operational infrastructure. | 18 |
| 2021 | “Accelerate and Simplify” Patching Principles | Focused on Upgrade Automation, ISSU, and Hot Patching Micro Images. | 19 |
| Ongoing | Cisco DNA Center and vManage | Provide centralized and automated software image and patch management. | 19 |
| Ongoing | Cisco IOS Software Checker | Tool to help customers identify impacted software releases and fixed versions. | 20 |









