Documentation forWeb Help Desk
Thinking of upgrading to the cloud? Learn more about migrating from Web Help Desk to Service Desk.

WHD 12.8.6 release notes

Release date: May 27, 2025

Here's what's new in Web Help Desk 12.8.6.

Learn more

New features and improvements in WHD

Time-period option added to limit tickets display

A ticket history interval setting is now available in WHD. This allows admins to define a time-based filter—in days, weeks, months, or years—to limit the number of tickets displayed in the History tab. Once the interval is set, tickets are filtered based on their last updated date, improving performance by preventing older tickets from loading. However, specific tickets can still be found by using the search bar, regardless of the interval configured.

Setting the time period interval

Ticket list with a time period interval set

Purchase Orders tab updates

  • A quantity field has been added to the Purchase Orders tab.
  • Sorting of parent-child relationship is now available. Sorting is based on asset number, quantity, part number, model, and cost.
  • Child rows can now be hidden or shown under their respective parent rows. Parent rows are displayed in grey color, and child rows are in white color.

Support for Google OAuth outgoing email server

Outgoing email accounts can be set up with Google OAuth.

Tomcat upgrade

Tomcat has been updated to the latest and most secure version available (9.0.104).

Other SolarWinds library software updates

  • PgAdmin4 has been upgraded to 9.3 version
  • Upgraded has been upgraded to JDK 11.0.27

Fixes

Last updated:

Case number Description
01862122, 01848853, 01864101 Emails are sent correctly when an accepted domain is added in the Outgoing mail account configuration.
01824573 Improved stability and reliability due to reduced resource use of the WMI discovery progress bar.
01779741 The password complexity advisory message is displayed correctly.

CVEs

Last updated: 5/27/2025

SolarWinds would like to thank our Security Researchers below for reporting on the issue in a responsible manner and working with our security, product, and engineering teams to fix the vulnerability.

SolarWinds CVEs

CVE-ID Vulnerability Title Description Severity Credit
CVE-2025-2945 pgAdmin 4 Remote Code Execution Vulnerability Remote Code Execution security vulnerability in pgAdmin 4 (Query Tool and Cloud Deployment modules). The vulnerability is associated with the 2 POST endpoints; /sqleditor/query_tool/download, where the query_commited parameter and /cloud/deploy endpoint, where the high_availability parameter is unsafely passed to the Python eval() function, allowing arbitrary code execution. This issue affects pgAdmin 4: before 9.2. 9.9 Critical
CVE-2024-5535 OpenSSL Buffer Over-read Vulnerability Calling the OpenSSL API function SSL_select_next_proto with an empty supported client protocols buffer may cause a crash or memory contents to be sent to the peer. Impact summary: A buffer overread can have a range of potential consequences such as unexpected application beahviour or a crash. In particular this issue could result in up to 255 bytes of arbitrary private data from memory being sent to the peer leading to a loss of confidentiality. However, only applications that directly call the SSL_select_next_proto function with a 0 length list of supported client protocols are affected by this issue. This would normally never be a valid scenario and is typically not under attacker control but may occur by accident in the case of a configuration or programming error in the calling application. The OpenSSL API function SSL_select_next_proto is typically used by TLS applications that support ALPN (Application Layer Protocol Negotiation) or NPN (Next Protocol Negotiation). NPN is older, was never standardised and is deprecated in favour of ALPN. We believe that ALPN is significantly more widely deployed than NPN. The SSL_select_next_proto function accepts a list of protocols from the server and a list of protocols from the client and returns the first protocol that appears in the server list that also appears in the client list. In the case of no overlap between the two lists it returns the first item in the client list. In either case it will signal whether an overlap between the two lists was found. In the case where SSL_select_next_proto is called with a zero length client list it fails to notice this condition and returns the memory immediately following the client list pointer (and reports that there was no overlap in the lists). This function is typically called from a server side application callback for ALPN or a client side application callback for NPN. In the case of ALPN the list of protocols supplied by the client is guaranteed by libssl to never be zero in length. The list of server protocols comes from the application and should never normally be expected to be of zero length. In this case if the SSL_select_next_proto function has been called as expected (with the list supplied by the client passed in the client/client_len parameters), then the application will not be vulnerable to this issue. If the application has accidentally been configured with a zero length server list, and has accidentally passed that zero length server list in the client/client_len parameters, and has additionally failed to correctly handle a "no overlap" response (which would normally result in a handshake failure in ALPN) then it will be vulnerable to this problem. In the case of NPN, the protocol permits the client to opportunistically select a protocol when there is no overlap. OpenSSL returns the first client protocol in the no overlap case in support of this. The list of client protocols comes from the application and should never normally be expected to be of zero length. However if the SSL_select_next_proto function is accidentally called with a client_len of 0 then an invalid memory pointer will be returned instead. If the application uses this output as the opportunistic protocol then the loss of confidentiality will occur. This issue has been assessed as Low severity because applications are most likely to be vulnerable if they are using NPN instead of ALPN - but NPN is not widely used. It also requires an application configuration or programming error. Finally, this issue would not typically be under attacker control making active exploitation unlikely. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. Due to the low severity of this issue we are not issuing new releases of OpenSSL at this time. The fix will be included in the next releases when they become available. 9.1 Critical
CVE-2024-4741 OpenSSL Use-after-free (UAF) Vulnerability Calling the OpenSSL API function SSL_free_buffers may cause memory to be accessed that was previously freed in some situations Impact summary: A use after free can have a range of potential consequences such as the corruption of valid data, crashes or execution of arbitrary code. However, only applications that directly call the SSL_free_buffers function are affected by this issue. Applications that do not call this function are not vulnerable. Our investigations indicate that this function is rarely used by applications. The SSL_free_buffers function is used to free the internal OpenSSL buffer used when processing an incoming record from the network. The call is only expected to succeed if the buffer is not currently in use. However, two scenarios have been identified where the buffer is freed even when still in use. The first scenario occurs where a record header has been received from the network and processed by OpenSSL, but the full record body has not yet arrived. In this case calling SSL_free_buffers will succeed even though a record has only been partially processed and the buffer is still in use. The second scenario occurs where a full record containing application data has been received and processed by OpenSSL but the application has only read part of this data. Again a call to SSL_free_buffers will succeed even though the buffer is still in use. While these scenarios could occur accidentally during normal operation a malicious attacker could attempt to engineer a stituation where this occurs. We are not aware of this issue being actively exploited. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. 7.5 High
CVE-2025-2946 pgAdmin 4 Cross-Site Scripting(XSS) Vulnerability pgAdmin 6.1 Medium
CVE-2024-2511 OpenSSL Denial of Service (DoS) Vulnerability Some non-default TLS server configurations can cause unbounded memory growth when processing TLSv1.3 sessions Impact summary: An attacker may exploit certain server configurations to trigger unbounded memory growth that would lead to a Denial of Service This problem can occur in TLSv1.3 if the non-default SSL_OP_NO_TICKET option is being used (but not if early_data support is also configured and the default anti-replay protection is in use). In this case, under certain conditions, the session cache can get into an incorrect state and it will fail to flush properly as it fills. The session cache will continue to grow in an unbounded manner. A malicious client could deliberately create the scenario for this failure to force a Denial of Service. It may also happen by accident in normal operation. This issue only affects TLS servers supporting TLSv1.3. It does not affect TLS clients. The FIPS modules in 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. OpenSSL 1.0.2 is also not affected by this issue. 5.9 Medium
CVE-2024-4603 OpenSSL Denial of Service (DoS) Vulnerability Checking excessively long DSA keys or parameters may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use the functions EVP_PKEY_param_check() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() to check a DSA public key or DSA parameters may experience long delays. Where the key or parameters that are being checked have been obtained from an untrusted source this may lead to a Denial of Service. The functions EVP_PKEY_param_check() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() perform various checks on DSA parameters. Some of those computations take a long time if the modulus (`p` parameter) is too large. Trying to use a very large modulus is slow and OpenSSL will not allow using public keys with a modulus which is over 10,000 bits in length for signature verification. However the key and parameter check functions do not limit the modulus size when performing the checks. An application that calls EVP_PKEY_param_check() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial of Service attack. These functions are not called by OpenSSL itself on untrusted DSA keys so only applications that directly call these functions may be vulnerable. Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL pkey and pkeyparam command line applications when using the `-check` option. The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue. The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are affected by this issue. 5.3 Medium
CVE-2024-9143 OpenSSL Out-of-Bounds Memory Writes Vulnerability Use of the low-level GF(2^m) elliptic curve APIs with untrusted explicit values for the field polynomial can lead to out-of-bounds memory reads or writes. Impact summary: Out of bound memory writes can lead to an application crash or even a possibility of a remote code execution, however, in all the protocols involving Elliptic Curve Cryptography that we're aware of, either only "named curves" are supported, or, if explicit curve parameters are supported, they specify an X9.62 encoding of binary (GF(2^m)) curves that can't represent problematic input values. Thus the likelihood of existence of a vulnerable application is low. In particular, the X9.62 encoding is used for ECC keys in X.509 certificates, so problematic inputs cannot occur in the context of processing X.509 certificates. Any problematic use-cases would have to be using an "exotic" curve encoding. The affected APIs include: EC_GROUP_new_curve_GF2m(), EC_GROUP_new_from_params(), and various supporting BN_GF2m_*() functions. Applications working with "exotic" explicit binary (GF(2^m)) curve parameters, that make it possible to represent invalid field polynomials with a zero constant term, via the above or similar APIs, may terminate abruptly as a result of reading or writing outside of array bounds. Remote code execution cannot easily be ruled out. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. 4.3 Medium

Installation or upgrade

Last updated:

For new installations, you can download the installer from the SolarWinds website or from the Customer Portal. For more information, see the WHD Installation and Upgrade Guide.

  • WHD supports Windows Server 2019 and 2022 for production environments and Windows 11 for trial evaluations. These operating system require additional setup to install. See the WHD Installation and Upgrade Guide for instructions.

  • WHD no longer includes the additional configuration files required to enable Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) mode in the application. To install WHD and enable FIPS, see Enable FIPS in a new deployment in the WHD Administrator Guide.

For upgrades, use Upgrade WHD to plan and execute your upgrade.

  • Determine your upgrade path.

  • Download and install the upgrade package(s) from the SolarWinds Customer Portal.

  • After you have upgraded Web Help Desk, download and install any available hotfixes for this version of Web Help Desk. Hotfixes are available in the Customer Portal.

After you complete the installation, see the WHD Getting Started Guide. This guide picks up right after the installation process and walks you through the initial steps you need to take to start using the application.

Legal notices

© 2025 SolarWinds Worldwide, LLC. All rights reserved.

This document may not be reproduced by any means nor modified, decompiled, disassembled, published or distributed, in whole or in part, or translated to any electronic medium or other means without the prior written consent of SolarWinds. All right, title, and interest in and to the software, services, and documentation are and shall remain the exclusive property of SolarWinds, its affiliates, and/or its respective licensors.

SOLARWINDS DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, CONDITIONS, OR OTHER TERMS, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, STATUTORY OR OTHERWISE, ON THE DOCUMENTATION, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION NONINFRINGEMENT, ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, OR USEFULNESS OF ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN. IN NO EVENT SHALL SOLARWINDS, ITS SUPPLIERS, NOR ITS LICENSORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES, WHETHER ARISING IN TORT, CONTRACT OR ANY OTHER LEGAL THEORY, EVEN IF SOLARWINDS HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

The SolarWinds, SolarWinds & Design, Orion, and THWACK trademarks are the exclusive property of SolarWinds Worldwide, LLC or its affiliates, are registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and may be registered or pending registration in other countries. All other SolarWinds trademarks, service marks, and logos may be common law marks or are registered or pending registration. All other trademarks mentioned herein are used for identification purposes only and are trademarks of (and may be registered trademarks) of their respective companies.