IBM BigFix Remote Control up to 9.1.2 cross-site request forgery
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 8.4 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability identified as problematic has been detected in IBM BigFix Remote Control up to 9.1.2. This affects an unknown function. The manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. This vulnerability is listed as CVE-2016-2963. The attack may be initiated remotely. There is no available exploit. You should upgrade the affected component.
Details
A vulnerability was found in IBM BigFix Remote Control up to 9.1.2 (Remote Access Software) and classified as critical. This issue affects some unknown functionality. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a cross-site request forgery vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-352. The web application does not, or can not, sufficiently verify whether a well-formed, valid, consistent request was intentionally provided by the user who submitted the request. Impacted is confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in IBM BigFix Remote Control before 9.1.3 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests that insert XSS sequences.
The bug was discovered 10/08/2016. The weakness was presented 11/30/2016 (Website). The advisory is shared at www-01.ibm.com. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2016-2963 since 03/09/2016. The attack may be initiated remotely. No form of authentication is needed for a successful exploitation. It demands that the victim is doing some kind of user interaction. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available.
The vulnerability was handled as a non-public zero-day exploit for at least 53 days. During that time the estimated underground price was around $5k-$25k.
Upgrading to version 9.1.3 eliminates this vulnerability.
The vulnerability is also documented in the vulnerability database at SecurityFocus (BID 94596†). See VDB-93889 for similar entry. If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Type
Vendor
Name
Version
License
Website
- Vendor: https://www.ibm.com/
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 8.8VulDB Meta Temp Score: 8.6
VulDB Base Score: 8.8
VulDB Temp Score: 8.4
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 8.8
NVD Vector: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Cross-site request forgeryCWE: CWE-352 / CWE-862 / CWE-863
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: UpgradeStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Upgrade: BigFix Remote Control 9.1.3
Timeline
03/09/2016 🔍10/08/2016 🔍
11/30/2016 🔍
11/30/2016 🔍
11/30/2016 🔍
11/30/2016 🔍
06/13/2019 🔍
Sources
Vendor: ibm.comAdvisory: www-01.ibm.com
Status: Not defined
Confirmation: 🔍
CVE: CVE-2016-2963 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2016-2963
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-93893
SecurityFocus: 94596 - IBM BigFix Remote Control CVE-2016-2963 Cross Site Request Forgery Vulnerability
See also: 🔍
Entry
Created: 11/30/2016 20:59Updated: 06/13/2019 10:34
Changes: 11/30/2016 20:59 (53), 06/13/2019 10:34 (13)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.