CVE-2016-0279
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 · uneditedHeap-based buffer overflow in the KeyView PDF filter in IBM Domino 8.5.x before 8.5.3 FP6 IF13 and 9.x before 9.0.1 FP6 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted PDF document, a different vulnerability than CVE-2016-0277, CVE-2016-0278, and CVE-2016-0301.
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 confidenceHeap-based buffer overflow in IBM Domino's KeyView PDF filter allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted PDF document. The vulnerability affects Domino 8.5.x before 8.5.3 FP6 IF13 and 9.x before 9.0.1 FP6.
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= 8.5.2= 8.5.2.1= 8.5.2.2= 8.5.2.3= 8.5.0= 8.5.3= 8.5.3.1= 8.5.3.2= 8.5.3.3= 8.5.3.4= 8.5.3.5= 8.5.1CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 IBM Domino versionCheck the installed Domino version using the Domino console command 'show version' or by viewing the program files version information. Compare the version number against the affected list: 8.5.0, 8.5.1, 8.5.2 through 8.5.2.3, 8.5.3 through 8.5.3.5, or any 9.x version prior to 9.0.1 FP6.Affected if The installed Domino version matches one of the affected versions listed in the CVE.
-
Determine Feature Pack levelCheck the installed Feature Pack version via Domino console command 'show config' or by examining the Domino installation directory for FP information. Look for FP6 IF13 or later for 8.5.x, or FP6 or later for 9.x.Affected if The Feature Pack level is below 8.5.3 FP6 IF13 for 8.5.x versions, or below 9.0.1 FP6 for 9.x versions.
-
Verify KeyView PDF filter is enabledCheck if the KeyView PDF filter is active by examining Domino server configuration documents, specifically the 'Index Settings' for full-text search, or by checking if PDF indexing is enabled in the Domino Directory under Server Configuration. The filter processes PDF attachments during full-text indexing.Affected if The KeyView PDF filter is enabled and Domino is configured to process PDF documents for full-text indexing or attachment viewing.
A user is affected if they run a vulnerable Domino version (8.5.x before FP6 IF13 or 9.x before FP6) with the KeyView PDF filter enabled for processing PDF documents.
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 IBM Domino interim fix 8.5.3 FP6 IF13 for version 8.5.x or upgrade to 9.0.1 FP6 for version 9.x. Until patched, restrict or disable PDF processing for untrusted documents.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-0279 — 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-2016-0279 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