CVE-2006-6985
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 · uneditedCross-domain vulnerability in Maxthon 1.5.6 build 42 allows remote attackers to access restricted information from other domains via an object tag with a data parameter that references a link on the attacker's originating site that specifies a Location HTTP header that references the target site, which then makes that content available through the outerHTML attribute of the object, a similar vulnerability to CVE-2006-3280.
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 · high confidenceCross-domain information disclosure vulnerability in Maxthon 1.5.6 build 42 where an attacker exploits an object tag with a data parameter pointing to a redirector on their domain, which uses a Location HTTP header to fetch content from a target domain, then accesses that content through the outerHTML attribute - bypassing the same-origin policy.
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 data= 1.5.6_build_42CVSS 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
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
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.
-
Confirm Maxthon is installedCheck for Maxthon installation in typical Windows locations: look in 'C:\Program Files\Maxthon' or 'C:\Program Files (x86)\Maxthon' directories, or check registry under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Maxthon or HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\MaxthonAffected if Maxthon browser is found on the system
-
Identify Maxthon versionLocate the Maxthon executable (Maxthon.exe) and check its version properties, or launch Maxthon and access the About dialog via Help > About Maxthon, or check Add/Remove Programs for the installed versionAffected if The version displayed is 1.5.6_build_42 specifically
-
Verify build numberIn Maxthon's About dialog or in the version properties of Maxthon.exe, confirm the exact build number matches 'build 42' or 'build_42'Affected if The build number is exactly 42 (1.5.6_build_42)
-
Check for browser usageSince this is a client-side vulnerability, determine if the affected Maxthon version is actively used as a browser - check if Maxthon is set as default browser or commonly usedAffected if Users actively use this specific version of Maxthon for web browsing
A user is affected if Maxthon version 1.5.6_build_42 is installed and actively used, as this specific version contains the cross-domain information disclosure flaw via object tag and outerHTML attribute.
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 dataSince this is a client-side browser vulnerability, the primary mitigation is upgrading Maxthon to a patched version or migrating to a modern browser with current security updates.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-6985 — 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-2006-6985 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