CVE-2015-6984
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 · uneditedlibarchive in Apple OS X before 10.11.1 allows attackers to write to arbitrary files via a crafted app that conducts an unspecified symlink attack.
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 confidencelibarchive in Apple OS X before 10.11.1 contains a vulnerability allowing a crafted application to conduct a symlink attack, enabling attackers to write to arbitrary files on the system outside the intended archive extraction path.
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<= 10.11.0CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:C/A:C
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.
-
Check the installed OS X versionOpen Terminal and run: sw_vers -productVersionAffected if The version returned is 10.11.0 or earlier (e.g., 10.10.5, 10.10.4, etc.)
-
Verify libarchive library presenceCheck if libarchive exists on the system: ls -la /usr/lib/libarchive*Affected if The library files exist on the system (this is expected for affected OS versions)
-
Confirm extraction functionality is in useDetermine if any applications use libarchive for archive extraction by checking common archive handling tools: which unarchive or file /usr/lib/libarchive*Affected if Archive extraction tools are available and libarchive is linked (typical for OS X systems)
If the system is running OS X 10.11.0 or earlier and has libarchive present, the environment is vulnerable to symlink attacks when extracting untrusted archives.
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 dataUpdate affected systems to OS X 10.11.1 or later which contains the patched version of libarchive.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA0.5 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-2015-6984 — 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-2015-6984 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