CVE-2011-1416
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 · uneditedThe Research In Motion (RIM) BlackBerry Torch 9800 with firmware 6.0.0.246 allows attackers to read the contents of memory locations via unknown vectors, as demonstrated by Vincenzo Iozzo, Willem Pinckaers, and Ralf-Philipp Weinmann during a Pwn2Own competition at CanSecWest 2011.
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 confidenceA memory disclosure vulnerability in the BlackBerry Torch 9800 firmware 6.0.0.246 allows attackers to read arbitrary memory locations. This information disclosure issue was demonstrated at Pwn2Own CanSecWest 2011 and could potentially aid in exploit chain development.
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= 6.0.0.246all 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
- 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.
-
Identify the device modelVerify if the device is a BlackBerry Torch 9800 by checking the physical hardware labeling or device settingsAffected if Device is a BlackBerry Torch 9800
-
Check the installed firmware versionNavigate to device Options > About (or equivalent) to view the firmware version, or connect to BlackBerry Desktop Manager to read the OS versionAffected if Firmware version is 6.0.0.246 or any version of the Torch 9800 firmware (advisory states all versions are affected)
The environment is affected if the device is a BlackBerry Torch 9800 running any firmware version, as the advisory indicates all versions of this device are vulnerable to this memory disclosure flaw.
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 firmware-level vulnerability on a legacy device from 2011, the primary remediation is to replace the device if still in production use, as vendor support is extremely unlikely. If the device is still within a support window, apply any available firmware updates from RIM.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 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-2011-1416 — 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-2011-1416 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