CVE-2016-10585
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 · uneditedlibxl provides Node bindings for the libxl library for reading and writing excel (XLS and XLSX) spreadsheets. libxl downloads zipped resources over HTTP, which leaves it vulnerable to MITM attacks. It may be possible to cause remote code execution (RCE) by swapping out the requested zip file with an attacker controlled zip file if the attacker is on the network or positioned in between the user and the remote server.
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 confidencelibxl Node.js bindings fetch zipped resources (likely the underlying libxl library files) over unencrypted HTTP, allowing network attackers to perform MITM attacks and inject malicious code via modified zip files, potentially achieving RCE.
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<= 0.3.0CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/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.
-
Identify installed libxl versionRun 'npm list libxl' or check package.json for the libxl dependency versionAffected if The installed version is 0.3.0 or lower
-
Locate libxl package source filesFind the libxl module directory in node_modules (typically node_modules/libxl/) and examine the package contentsAffected if The package contains downloaded resources or fetches external files
-
Inspect download mechanism in source codeSearch source files (.js files) for HTTP or https module usage, look for URLs containing 'http://' (not https://)Affected if Code uses unencrypted HTTP URLs to fetch resources
-
Check for zip/resource retrieval logicExamine code that handles zip file extraction or library file downloads, look for operations like download, unzip, or similarAffected if The library fetches and extracts zip files over network
-
Verify network transmission methodRun the application with network monitoring (e.g., tcpdump, Wireshark) or proxy to observe actual HTTP traffic from the libxl moduleAffected if The application makes unencrypted HTTP requests to external hosts
A user is affected if they have libxl version 0.3.0 or lower AND their environment fetches or loads library resources over unencrypted HTTP connections.
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 dataReplace HTTP URLs with HTTPS for all resource downloads and implement checksum/signature verification of downloaded files before extraction or use of the library.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 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 $4,464.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-10585 — 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-2016-10585 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