CVE-2016-0929
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 · uneditedThe metrics-collection component in RabbitMQ for Pivotal Cloud Foundry (PCF) 1.6.x before 1.6.4 logs command lines of failed commands, which might allow context-dependent attackers to obtain sensitive information by reading the log data, as demonstrated by a syslog message that contains credentials from a command line.
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 confidenceThe metrics-collection component in RabbitMQ for Pivotal Cloud Foundry versions 1.6.x before 1.6.4 logs the full command lines of failed commands, including any credentials passed as arguments. This exposes sensitive information such as passwords or API keys in plaintext logs, creating an information disclosure vulnerability with CVSS 7.5.
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= 1.6.0= 1.6.1= 1.6.2= 1.6.3CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 RabbitMQ for PCF installation and versionQuery the installed version of RabbitMQ for Pivotal Cloud Foundry in your environment. This may be via the PCF ops manager, tile registry, or package version listing depending on your deployment method.Affected if The installed version is 1.6.0, 1.6.1, 1.6.2, or 1.6.3.
-
Verify metrics-collection component is enabledConfirm that the metrics-collection component is active in the RabbitMQ for PCF installation. Check the component configuration or service enabled status.Affected if The metrics-collection component is enabled and the version is in the affected range.
-
Inspect log files for plaintext credentialsSearch RabbitMQ log files for failed command entries that may contain command-line arguments. Look for patterns where passwords, API keys, or other credentials appear in plaintext within log entries showing failed commands.Affected if Log files contain plaintext credentials passed as command-line arguments to failed commands.
You are affected if RabbitMQ for PCF is installed at version 1.6.0-1.6.3, the metrics-collection component is enabled, and log files contain plaintext credentials from failed command executions.
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 RabbitMQ for PCF to version 1.6.4 or later, which addresses the credential logging issue. Alternatively, implement log scrubbing or restrict access to log files to mitigate exposure of sensitive data.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-0929 — 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-2016-0929 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