CVE-2016-0877
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 · uneditedMemory leak on Moxa Secure Router EDR-G903 devices before 3.4.12 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) by executing the ping function.
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 confidenceMemory leak vulnerability in the ping function of Moxa EDR-G903 secure routers running firmware versions prior to 3.4.12. Remote attackers can repeatedly execute the ping function to exhaust device memory, causing denial of service.
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< 3.4.12CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 the device modelAccess the router web interface, CLI, or use network discovery to confirm the device is a Moxa EDR-G903 model. Check the device label, web interface header, or SNMP sysDescr for the model identifier.Affected if The device is confirmed to be a Moxa EDR-G903 unit.
-
Check the installed firmware versionLocate the firmware version in the router web interface (typically under System > Firmware or Status), CLI (show version or similar command), or SNMP OID. Compare the version number to 3.4.12.Affected if The firmware version is below 3.4.12, indicating the device is running a vulnerable version.
-
Verify ping functionality is accessibleDetermine if the ping function is exposed to network access. Check firewall rules, access control lists, or network segmentation settings that govern who can reach the ping interface. Attempt a ping request from an external location if authorized, or review the access control configuration.Affected if The ping function is reachable from an untrusted network segment without proper access restrictions.
-
Look for memory exhaustion symptomsReview device performance logs, memory usage statistics, or system health indicators. Check if the device exhibits slow response, frequent reboots, or memory allocation failures, especially if correlated with ping activity.Affected if The device shows signs of memory exhaustion or degradation consistent with the memory leak when ping is used.
A defender is affected if they have a Moxa EDR-G903 router with firmware version prior to 3.4.12 and the ping function is accessible, particularly from untrusted networks.
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 data3.4.12
Upgrade Moxa EDR-G903 firmware to version 3.4.12 or later to patch the memory leak. If patching is not immediately feasible, restrict access to the ping functionality through firewall rules or network segmentation to reduce attack surface.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-0877 — 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-2016-0877 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