CVE-2006-6703
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedMultiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in Oracle Portal 9i and 10g allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary JavaScript via the tc parameter in webapp/jsp/container_tabs.jsp, and other unspecified vectors.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Oracle Portal 9i and 10g allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary JavaScript via the tc parameter in webapp/jsp/container_tabs.jsp. The vulnerability stems from insufficient input validation/sanitization of user-supplied data in the affected parameter, allowing malicious scripts to be executed in the context of a user's browser session.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE dataall versionsall versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Locate the vulnerable JSP fileSearch for container_tabs.jsp in the Oracle Portal web application directory structure. Common paths include $ORACLE_HOME/portal/webapp/jsp/ or within the deployed portal web application directory.Affected if The file webapp/jsp/container_tabs.jsp exists in the Oracle Portal installation
-
Confirm Oracle Portal versionCheck the installed Oracle Portal version through Oracle Universal Installer, Oracle Enterprise Manager, or by examining Oracle inventory files. Compare your installed version against Oracle9i and Oracle10g.Affected if The installed version is Oracle9i or Oracle10g (any version)
-
Verify tc parameter accessibilityAttempt to access the affected endpoint with a test tc parameter value (for example: /webapp/jsp/container_tabs.jsp?tc=testvalue) and observe whether the value is reflected back in the response without sanitization.Affected if The tc parameter value is echoed back in the HTML output without proper encoding or sanitization
-
Inspect input handling in the affected fileIf source code access is available, examine container_tbs.jsp for the tc parameter handling logic. Look for lack of input validation, sanitization, or output encoding before the parameter is used in HTML output.Affected if The tc parameter is used directly in the response without input validation or output encoding
A user is affected if they have Oracle Portal 9i or 10g installed and the tc parameter in container_tabs.jsp reflects unsanitized user input back to the browser.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply Oracle Critical Patch Updates for Oracle Portal 9i/10g or implement input validation/sanitization for the tc parameter and other user-supplied inputs. If patches are unavailable, consider deploying a Web Application Firewall (WAF) to filter malicious requests.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,760.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-6703 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2006-6703 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data