CVE-2016-0911
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 · uneditedEMC Data Domain OS 5.4 through 5.7 before 5.7.2.0 has a default no_root_squash option for NFS exports, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain filesystem access by leveraging client root privileges.
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 confidenceEMC Data Domain OS versions 5.4 through 5.7 before 5.7.2.0 ships with a default NFS export configuration that includes the no_root_squash option. This allows remote clients connecting via NFS to retain root privileges when accessing exported filesystems, enabling attackers with root access on NFS client machines to obtain privileged filesystem access on the Data Domain system.
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<= 5.7.1.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/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.
-
Check Data Domain OS versionRun 'ddboost show version' or access the system management interface to view the OS versionAffected if Version is 5.4.x, 5.5.x, 5.6.x, or 5.7.0-5.7.1.0 (any version from 5.4 through 5.7.1.0)
-
Verify NFS export is configuredRun 'nfs export list' or check the NFS export configuration on the Data Domain system to see if any NFS exports existAffected if NFS exports are configured and active on the system
-
Inspect NFS export configuration for no_root_squashRun 'nfs export show' for each export, or examine the NFS export configuration files to identify whether the 'no_root_squash' option is present in any export entryAffected if The no_root_squash option is enabled in any NFS export configuration
A system is affected if it runs Data Domain OS version 5.4 through 5.7.1.0, has NFS exports configured, and includes the no_root_squash option, allowing remote root users to retain privileged access on exported filesystems.
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 dataModify NFS export configurations to remove the no_root_squash option, replacing it with root_squash to map remote root users to unprivileged accounts, or restrict NFS exports to specific trusted IP addresses.
- 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-2016-0911 — 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-2016-0911 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