CVE-2016-0359
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 · uneditedCRLF injection vulnerability in IBM WebSphere Application Server (WAS) 7.0 before 7.0.0.43, 8.0 before 8.0.0.13, 8.5 Full before 8.5.5.10, and 8.5 Liberty before Liberty Fix Pack 16.0.0.2 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers and conduct HTTP response splitting attacks via a crafted URL.
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 confidenceCRLF injection vulnerability in IBM WebSphere Application Server allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers via crafted URLs containing CRLF sequences (%0D%0A), enabling HTTP response splitting attacks. This occurs due to insufficient input validation in the web container when processing URLs.
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= 7.0= 7.0.0.0= 7.0.0.1= 7.0.0.2= 7.0.0.3= 7.0.0.4= 7.0.0.5= 7.0.0.6= 7.0.0.7= 7.0.0.8= 7.0.0.9= 7.0.0.10CVSS 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
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 installed WebSphere Application Server versionCheck the version by viewing the about.html or about.xml file in the WebSphere installation directory (typically in the AppServer directory), or by running the versionInfo command from the bin directoryAffected if The version shown is 7.0.x and is lower than 7.0.0.43
-
Confirm the web container is enabledLog into the WebSphere Administrative Console, navigate to Servers > Server Types > WebSphere application servers, select your server, and verify the Web Container service is started or check server.xml for the webContainer elementAffected if The web container is enabled and running (this is the default configuration)
-
Test for CRLF injection susceptibilitySend a crafted HTTP request to the WebSphere server with a URL containing %0D%0A sequences (such as /test%0D%0AHeader:Value) and inspect whether the response splits or includes the injected headerAffected if The server accepts and reflects the CRLF sequence in the response, enabling HTTP response splitting
You are affected if WebSphere Application Server 7.0.x is installed with a version at or below 7.0.0.10 and the web container is enabled, allowing CRLF sequences in URLs to be processed without validation.
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 WebSphere fixes: upgrade to WAS 7.0.0.43+, 8.0.0.13+, 8.5 Full 8.5.5.10+, or Liberty Fix Pack 16.0.0.2+ per affected version. Validate URL input to reject CRLF sequences as a compensating control.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $5,184.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-0359 — 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-2016-0359 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