CVE-2016-10680
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 · uneditedadamvr-geoip-lite is a light weight native JavaScript implementation of GeoIP API from MaxMind adamvr-geoip-lite downloads geoip resources over HTTP, which leaves it vulnerable to MITM attacks. This impacts the integrity and availability of this geoip data that may alter the decisions made by an application using this data.
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 adamvr-geoip-lite package downloads GeoIP data resources over unencrypted HTTP instead of HTTPS, allowing attackers on the network path to intercept and modify the geoip data in transit through MITM attacks, potentially causing applications to make incorrect decisions based on tampered location data.
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<= 1.2.0CVSS 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:3.1/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.
-
Verify if adamvr-geoip-lite package is installedRun 'npm list adamvr-geoip-lite' or check package.json dependencies for the adamvr-geoip-lite entryAffected if The package appears in installed dependencies or package.json
-
Check the installed versionRun 'npm list adamvr-geoip-lite' to see the installed version number, or inspect the version field in node_modules/adamvr-geoip-lite/package.jsonAffected if The version is 1.2.0 or lower
-
Locate the package source code that handles GeoIP data downloadsInspect files in node_modules/adamvr-geoip-lite/ directory, particularly looking for JavaScript files that contain download, request, or geoip related codeAffected if Source code files exist in the package directory
-
Identify HTTP URLs used for downloading GeoIP dataSearch the package source code for 'http://' strings, particularly those pointing to MaxMind or other GeoIP data providers. Use 'grep -r "http://" node_modules/adamvr-geoip-lite/'Affected if URLs starting with http:// (not https://) are found in the code related to GeoIP data retrieval
-
Confirm if HTTP URLs are actually used at runtimeExamine the main entry point (index.js or similar) to see if the HTTP URLs are called during package initialization or when fetching GeoIP dataAffected if The HTTP URLs are executed when the package fetches or updates GeoIP data
If the adamvr-geoip-lite package version is 1.2.0 or lower and the package code contains http:// URLs used for downloading GeoIP data that get executed at runtime, the environment is affected by this CVE.
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 in the package's resource download code to ensure data integrity and protect against MITM attacks.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-10680 — 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-2016-10680 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