CVE-2016-0682 in Berkeley DB
Summary
by MITRE
Unspecified vulnerability in the DataStore component in Oracle Berkeley DB 11.2.5.0.32, 11.2.5.1.29, 11.2.5.2.42, 11.2.5.3.28, 12.1.6.0.35, and 12.1.6.1.26 allows local users to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability via unknown vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2016-0689, CVE-2016-0692, CVE-2016-0694, and CVE-2016-3418.
Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 07/26/2022
The vulnerability identified as CVE-2016-0682 represents a significant security flaw within Oracle Berkeley DB's DataStore component, affecting multiple versions including 11.2.5.0.32 through 11.2.5.3.28 and 12.1.6.0.35 through 12.1.6.1.26. This unspecified vulnerability operates at the core data storage layer of the database system, creating potential attack vectors that could compromise the fundamental security properties of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The vulnerability's classification as unspecified indicates that the exact technical mechanism remains undisclosed, which is common for certain types of memory corruption or logic flaws that may not be immediately apparent to security researchers.
The technical nature of this vulnerability suggests it operates within the DataStore component's internal processing mechanisms, potentially involving memory management, data validation, or access control functions. Given that this affects local users specifically, the attack surface likely involves privilege escalation scenarios or exploitation of the database's internal processes. The vulnerability's distinction from related CVEs such as CVE-2016-0689, CVE-2016-0692, CVE-2016-0694, and CVE-2016-3418 indicates it operates through different attack vectors or code paths, making it particularly concerning for system administrators who may have addressed other vulnerabilities but remain unaware of this distinct threat.
From an operational impact perspective, this vulnerability creates substantial risk for organizations relying on Oracle Berkeley DB for critical data storage operations. The potential compromise of confidentiality means that sensitive data could be accessed by unauthorized local users, while integrity issues could allow data corruption or manipulation. The availability impact suggests that the vulnerability may also enable denial of service conditions that could disrupt database operations. The local user requirement implies that attackers must already have access to the system, but this represents a significant escalation risk since local access often provides a foundation for further attacks.
The vulnerability's presence in multiple versions of Oracle Berkeley DB indicates a persistent flaw in the DataStore component's architecture that required patching across different release branches. This suggests either a fundamental design issue or a recurring code pattern that was not properly addressed during the development lifecycle. Organizations using these vulnerable versions face the risk of exploitation through various attack scenarios including privilege escalation, data exfiltration, or system disruption. The unspecified nature of the vulnerability means that security teams cannot easily determine specific defensive measures without detailed analysis or vendor advisories.
Security professionals should approach this vulnerability with heightened caution given its potential impact on the core data storage functionality. The vulnerability's classification under the broader Oracle Berkeley DB DataStore component aligns with common security concerns around database integrity and access control mechanisms. Organizations should implement immediate patch management procedures to address this vulnerability across all affected versions. The ATT&CK framework would likely categorize this vulnerability under privilege escalation or persistence techniques, while CWE classifications would probably relate to software fault patterns affecting database integrity and access control mechanisms. Mitigation strategies should include comprehensive system hardening, access control reviews, and monitoring for unauthorized local access attempts that could indicate exploitation attempts against this vulnerability.