Skip to main content
0-Doubt
NewsInvestorsQuestionnairesDeveloperHelp
AnonymousSign in
0-Doubt — neutral IT/Security research
BrowseResellersCertified analystsRFI/RFP questionnairesHow trust worksHelp & FAQAPI
  1. Home/
  2. NetScaler

NetScaler

enriched
Network Firewall (NGFW)

netscaler.com ↗ · required email domain for this vendor's users

Headquartered in United StatesHeadquarters countrySourced only from this vendor's own published headquarters address (schema.org structured data on their site) — never guessed from domain TLD. Source ↗

Do you work at NetScaler?

This profile was built from public sources and hasn't been claimed yet. Claiming it lets you correct what's wrong and add details only you can confirm — and marks that information as vendor-verified for buyers.

Free, and it does not affect ranking, placement, or comparison results. The first person verified on NetScaler's email domain becomes the profile admin.

Claim this profileAlready have an account?

Trust profileHow to read thisFive separate questions a buyer actually asks, each answered with its own evidence and a link to the source. There is deliberately no overall score: a single number invites comparison it cannot support, and would mostly reflect how much of NetScaler we have managed to scan rather than anything about the vendor.

Not checked means we have not looked yet, and is never counted against a vendor. Limited means we did look, but found only one line of evidence — enough to report, not enough to corroborate.

checked 8 of 16 signals
  • Limited

    Independently verified

    Has anyone other than the vendor confirmed this?

    checked 3 of 4

    Nothing here has been confirmed by an independent third party yet.

    • No third-party certifications found
    • Profile not claimed by the vendor
  • Limited

    Operating durability

    Is this a real, durable business?

    checked 2 of 4

    How long this vendor has been operating, and who stands behind them.

    • Headquarters: United States
  • Mixed

    Behaviour under stress

    What do they do when something goes wrong?

    checked 2 of 3

    What their public record shows about handling vulnerabilities and outages.

    • 100 published CVE(s) — a public disclosure record exists
    • 20 rated critical
    • No public status page found
  • Limited

    Disclosure posture

    Do they tell you the awkward things unprompted?

    checked 1 of 3

    How much this vendor volunteers before you have to ask.

    • No bug bounty or vulnerability disclosure policy found
  • Not checked

    Momentum

    Are they still shipping, or coasting?

    checked 0 of 2

    We have not tracked this vendor's release activity yet.

    Nothing checked here yet — this is not a mark against NetScaler.

Data coverage: 20/100What this measures (and doesn't)

Not a quality rating or endorsement — a measure of how much verified, disclosed data we actually have about this vendor. A low score usually means "we don't have much verified information yet," not "this is a bad vendor." Never used to sort or rank vendor lists.

Verification depth0/100
Security signal0/100
Buyer feedbackno data yet (0 reviews so far)
Profile completeness50/100
claim · HQ · materials · screenshots · integrations · certifications · security check

The platform admin controls the formula's weights.

Data coverage profileHow to read thisThe same four components behind the data coverage score above, shaped instead of listed — a vendor strong on verification but thin on buyer feedback looks visibly different from one that's the other way around. Security and feedback plot at the neutral midpoint (50) when there's no data yet (no products tracked, no reviews), matching how the actual score itself treats missing data — not a guess either way.

VerificationSecurityFeedbackCompletenessThis vendor — Verification: 0This vendor — Security: 0This vendor — Feedback: no data yetThis vendor — Completeness: 50

IntegrationsUI-12 — integration graphDetected from this vendor's own published integration/partner pages by the enrichment loop — each entry links the exact page it was found on. Directional: "integrates with" is claimed by this vendor; "integrated by" is claimed by the other vendor's site. Coverage grows as the scan progresses.

4 detected

Integrated by: ExtraHop, Seceon Inc, UncommonX, eSentire

Buyer reviewsUI-14 — verified-buyer reviewsWritten only by domain-verified buyers at other companies, attributed to their company domain (never their identity), and moderated. Buyer-sourced opinion, clearly separate from the neutral catalog facts above — and never an input to search or comparison ordering.

verified buyers only

No buyer reviews yet.

Reputation ratingUI-20 — anonymous ratingA single anonymous 5-star signal from buyers, resellers, and analysts who've engaged with this vendor — separate from the domain-attributed reviews above. No rater identity is ever shown, not even at company level.

anonymous

No ratings in this window yet.

External ratingsUI-22 — third-party ratingsAggregate rating and review count pulled directly from the source site's own published data — never the review text itself, which belongs to that site. Links go to the real page so you can read the actual reviews there.

via third-party review sites
PeerSpot: 4.2/5 (106 reviews) ↗

Application delivery controller for optimizing app performance and security AI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →

Security & trust signalsAbout these signalsCertifications are keyword-matched from the vendor's own public pages (each claim links to its source — verify directly before relying on it). Security headers are checked live against the vendor's homepage, re-checked every 90 days. Both are independent, automated signals, not a vendor-submitted or audited claim, and are not blended into a single score.

6 of 9 technical checks completed — not a score, just coverage

Security headers (5/5) — checked 8/13/2026

  • ✓ Strict-Transport-Security
  • ✓ Content-Security-Policy
  • ✓ X-Frame-Options
  • ✓ X-Content-Type-Options
  • ✓ Referrer-Policy
  • ✕ security.txt

CVE severity over timeUI-24 — CVE severity timelineEvery known CVE with a disclosure date and severity, plotted by when it was published — lets you see whether disclosures are trending toward more or less severe, not just a raw count. Same NVD-sourced, name-matched data as the list below.

LOWMEDIUMHIGHCRITICAL2008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026CVE-2026-3055 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2026-03-24CVE-2025-7776 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2025-08-26CVE-2025-7775 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2025-08-26CVE-2025-6543 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2025-06-25CVE-2025-5349 · HIGH 8.8 · 2025-06-17CVE-2025-4365 · HIGH 7.5 · 2025-06-17CVE-2024-12284 · HIGH 8.8 · 2025-02-20CVE-2024-8535 · HIGH 8.1 · 2024-11-13CVE-2024-8534 · HIGH 8.1 · 2024-11-13CVE-2024-6236 · HIGH 7.5 · 2024-07-11CVE-2024-5492 · MEDIUM 6.1 · 2024-07-10CVE-2024-5491 · HIGH 7.5 · 2024-07-10CVE-2023-6549 · HIGH 8.2 · 2024-01-18CVE-2023-6548 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2024-01-18CVE-2023-4967 · HIGH 8.2 · 2023-10-27CVE-2023-4966 · CRITICAL 9.4 · 2023-10-10CVE-2023-2858 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2023-05-27CVE-2021-22920 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2021-08-06CVE-2021-22919 · HIGH 7.5 · 2021-08-06CVE-2020-8247 · HIGH 8.8 · 2020-09-19CVE-2020-8246 · HIGH 7.5 · 2020-09-19CVE-2020-8245 · MEDIUM 6.1 · 2020-09-19CVE-2019-11345 · MEDIUM 6.1 · 2020-03-10CVE-2019-18225 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-10-21CVE-2019-12992 · HIGH 8.8 · 2019-07-16CVE-2019-12991 · HIGH 8.8 · 2019-07-16CVE-2019-12990 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-07-16CVE-2019-12989 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-07-16CVE-2019-12988 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-07-16CVE-2019-12987 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-07-16CVE-2019-12986 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-07-16CVE-2019-12985 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-07-16CVE-2019-10883 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-06-04CVE-2019-12044 · HIGH 7.5 · 2019-05-22CVE-2019-11550 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2019-05-08CVE-2019-10895 · HIGH 7.5 · 2019-04-09CVE-2019-6485 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2019-02-23CVE-2018-18517 · MEDIUM 4.8 · 2018-10-25CVE-2018-17448 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2018-10-24CVE-2018-17447 · HIGH 7.5 · 2018-10-24CVE-2018-17446 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2018-10-24CVE-2018-17445 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2018-10-24CVE-2018-17444 · HIGH 7.5 · 2018-10-24CVE-2018-7218 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2018-05-17CVE-2018-6811 · MEDIUM 6.1 · 2018-03-07CVE-2018-6810 · HIGH 7.5 · 2018-03-07CVE-2018-6809 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2018-03-07CVE-2018-6808 · HIGH 7.5 · 2018-03-07CVE-2018-5314 · HIGH 7.5 · 2018-03-01CVE-2018-6186 · HIGH 8.8 · 2018-02-01CVE-2017-17549 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2017-12-13CVE-2017-17382 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2017-12-13CVE-2017-14602 · HIGH 7.2 · 2017-09-26CVE-2015-3642 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2017-08-02CVE-2017-6316 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-07-20CVE-2017-7219 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-04-13CVE-2017-7700 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2017-04-13CVE-2017-6474 · HIGH 7.5 · 2017-03-04CVE-2017-6468 · HIGH 7.5 · 2017-03-04CVE-2017-6467 · HIGH 7.5 · 2017-03-04CVE-2017-5933 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2017-02-08CVE-2016-9028 · HIGH 8.8 · 2016-10-28CVE-2016-4945 · MEDIUM 6.1 · 2016-06-02CVE-2016-2072 · MEDIUM 6.1 · 2016-02-17CVE-2016-2071 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2016-02-17CVE-2015-7998 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2015-11-17CVE-2015-7997 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2015-11-17CVE-2015-7996 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2015-11-17CVE-2015-6672 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2015-09-17CVE-2015-5538 · HIGH 10.0 · 2015-09-17CVE-2015-5080 · HIGH 9.0 · 2015-07-16CVE-2015-2829 · HIGH 7.8 · 2015-05-12CVE-2015-2841 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2015-04-03CVE-2015-2840 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2015-04-03CVE-2015-2839 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2015-04-03CVE-2015-2838 · MEDIUM 6.8 · 2015-04-03CVE-2014-8580 · MEDIUM 4.9 · 2014-11-08CVE-2014-7140 · HIGH 7.5 · 2014-10-21CVE-2014-4347 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2014-07-16CVE-2014-4346 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2014-07-16CVE-2014-1899 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2014-05-02CVE-2014-2882 · HIGH 10.0 · 2014-05-01CVE-2014-2881 · HIGH 10.0 · 2014-05-01CVE-2013-6944 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2014-03-11CVE-2013-6943 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2014-03-11CVE-2013-6942 · MEDIUM 6.8 · 2014-03-11CVE-2013-6941 · HIGH 10.0 · 2014-03-11CVE-2013-6939 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2014-03-11CVE-2013-6940 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2014-03-11CVE-2013-6938 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2014-03-11CVE-2013-6011 · HIGH 7.8 · 2013-10-04CVE-2013-2767 · MEDIUM 5.4 · 2013-04-26CVE-2009-2213 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2009-06-26CVE-2007-6267 · LOW 2.1 · 2007-12-07CVE-2007-6192 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2007-11-30CVE-2007-6193 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2007-11-30CVE-2007-6037 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2007-11-20

Known CVEs (100)About this listSourced from the public NVD database, matched by vendor name. This is a name-based match, not exact version tracking — always check the linked NVD record for affected versions before drawing conclusions. “New” means published within the last 30 days. “Actively exploited” means CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog confirms real-world exploitation, not just a theoretical severity score.

RSS ⇢
  • CVE-2026-4368 ↗2026

    Race Condition in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway when appliance is configured as Gateway (SSL VPN, ICA Proxy, CVPN, RDP Proxy) or AAA virtual server leading to User Session Mixup

  • CVE-2026-3055 ↗⚠ actively exploitedCRITICAL 9.82026

    Insufficient input validation in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway when configured as a SAML IDP leading to memory overread

  • CVE-2025-12101 ↗2025

    Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway when the appliance is configured as a Gateway (VPN virtual server, ICA Proxy, CVPN, RDP Proxy) OR AAA virtual server

  • CVE-2025-8424 ↗2025

    Improper access control on the NetScaler Management Interface in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway when an attacker can get access to the appliance NSIP, Cluster Management IP or local GSLB Site IP …

  • CVE-2025-7776 ↗CRITICAL 9.82025

    Memory overflow vulnerability leading to unpredictable or erroneous behavior and Denial of Service in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway when NetScaler is configured as a Gateway (VPN virtual server,…

  • CVE-2025-7775 ↗⚠ actively exploitedCRITICAL 9.82025

    Memory overflow vulnerability leading to Remote Code Execution and/or Denial of Service in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway when NetScaler is configured as Gateway (VPN virtual server, ICA Proxy, C…

  • CVE-2025-6543 ↗⚠ actively exploitedCRITICAL 9.82025

    Memory overflow vulnerability leading to unintended control flow and Denial of Service in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway when configured as Gateway (VPN virtual server, ICA Proxy, CVPN, RDP Proxy…

  • CVE-2025-5349 ↗HIGH 8.82025

    Improper access control on the NetScaler Management Interface in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway

  • CVE-2025-4365 ↗HIGH 7.52025

    Arbitrary file read in NetScaler Console and NetScaler SDX (SVM)

  • CVE-2024-12284 ↗HIGH 8.82025

    Authenticated privilege escalation in NetScaler Console and NetScaler Agent allows.

  • CVE-2024-8535 ↗HIGH 8.12024

    Authenticated user can access unintended user capabilities in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway if the appliance must be configured as a Gateway (SSL VPN, ICA Proxy, CVPN, RDP Proxy) with KCDAccount…

  • CVE-2024-8534 ↗HIGH 8.12024

    Memory safety vulnerability leading to memory corruption and Denial of Service in NetScaler ADC and Gateway if the appliance must be configured as a Gateway (VPN Vserver) with RDP Feature enabled OR t…

  • CVE-2024-6236 ↗HIGH 7.52024

    Denial of Service in NetScaler Console (formerly NetScaler ADM), NetScaler Agent, and NetScaler SDX

  • CVE-2024-5492 ↗MEDIUM 6.12024

    Open redirect vulnerability allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to redirect users to arbitrary websites in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway

  • CVE-2024-5491 ↗HIGH 7.52024

    Denial of Service in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway in NetScaler

  • CVE-2023-6549 ↗⚠ actively exploitedHIGH 8.22024

    Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway allows Unauthenticated Denial of Service and Out-Of-Bounds Memory Read

  • CVE-2023-6548 ↗⚠ actively exploitedMEDIUM 5.52024

    Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway allows an attacker with access to NSIP, CLIP or SNIP with management interface to perform Authenticated…

  • CVE-2023-4967 ↗HIGH 8.22023

    Denial of Service in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway when configured as a Gateway (VPN virtual server, ICA Proxy, CVPN, RDP Proxy) or AAA Virtual Server

  • CVE-2023-4966 ↗⚠ actively exploitedCRITICAL 9.42023

    Sensitive information disclosure in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway when configured as a Gateway (VPN virtual server, ICA Proxy, CVPN, RDP Proxy) or AAA  virtual server.

  • CVE-2023-2858 ↗MEDIUM 5.32023

    NetScaler file parser crash in Wireshark 4.0.0 to 4.0.5 and 3.6.0 to 3.6.13 allows denial of service via crafted capture file

  • …and 80 more

Resources & materials (3)

discovered on their site

Datasheets, whitepapers, and case studies found on netscaler.com by the enrichment loop. Links open the original documents on the vendor's own site.

  • pdfNetscaler Fips Data Sheet↗
  • pdfNetscaler Data Sheet↗
  • pdfTolly Group Validates Netscaler Adc Over F5↗

Competitors (12)

full alternatives comparison →
ADVANTUS360AhnLabAlbariusAlgoSecAllotArray NetworksBarracudaBBT.live (BeBroadband)Cato NetworksCheck Point SoftwareCiscoClavister

Products (1)

Network Firewall (NGFW)

1
  • Citrix NetScalerAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Application delivery controller for optimizing app performance and security