CVE-2016-0362
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 · uneditedIBM TRIRIGA Application Platform 3.3 before 3.3.2.6, 3.4 before 3.4.2.4, and 3.5 before 3.5.0.2 allows remote authenticated users to conduct server-side request forgery (SSRF) attacks, and trigger network traffic to arbitrary intranet or Internet hosts, via a crafted proxy request to a web service.
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 confidenceIBM TRIRIGA Application Platform contains a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in its web service proxy functionality. Remote authenticated users can craft malicious proxy requests to cause the server to make outbound connections to arbitrary intranet or Internet hosts, potentially enabling internal network reconnaissance or attacks against internal services.
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= 3.3.0.0= 3.3.0.1= 3.3.0.2= 3.3.1.0= 3.3.1.1= 3.3.1.2= 3.3.1.3= 3.3.2.0= 3.3.2.1= 3.3.2.2= 3.3.2.3= 3.3.2.4CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/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 IBM TRIRIGA versionLocate the version information for your IBM TRIRIGA Application Platform installation (typically found in the product dashboard, About section, or installation metadata). Compare this version number against the affected list: 3.3.0.0, 3.3.0.1, 3.3.0.2, 3.3.1.0, 3.3.1.1, 3.3.1.2, 3.3.1.3, 3.3.2.0, 3.3.2.1, 3.3.2.2, 3.3.2.3, 3.3.2.4Affected if The installed version matches any of the listed affected versions (exact version equality required)
-
Verify web service proxy functionality is enabledInspect your IBM TRIRIGA configuration to determine whether the web service proxy feature is active. This typically involves reviewing proxy-related settings in the application administration console or configuration files.Affected if The web service proxy functionality is enabled and accessible to users
-
Confirm remote authentication is possibleDetermine if the system permits remote user authentication (through LDAP, SSO, or local user accounts) that would allow external users to access the TRIRIGA web interface and web service endpoints.Affected if Remote authentication is configured and external users can log in to access application features
Your environment is affected if your installed IBM TRIRIGA version is exactly 3.3.0.0 through 3.3.2.4 AND the web service proxy feature is enabled AND remote users can authenticate to the platform.
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 dataUpgrade IBM TRIRIGA Application Platform to version 3.3.2.6, 3.4.2.4, 3.5.0.2 or later. Additionally, apply network segmentation and restrict outbound connectivity from the application server to minimize impact of potential SSRF exploitation.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-0362 — 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-2016-0362 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