CVE-2016-10793
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 · uneditedcPanel before 59.9999.145 allows arbitrary code execution due to an incorrect #! in Mail::SPF scripts (SEC-152).
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 confidenceThe cPanel application contains a vulnerability in Mail::SPF scripts where an incorrect or missing shebang (#!) line causes the scripts to be executed by an unintended interpreter, potentially allowing authenticated attackers to execute arbitrary code on the server.
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>= 11.51.9999.98, < 11.52.6.6>= 11.54.0.0, < 11.54.0.29>= 55.9999.61, < 56.0.34>= 57.9999.48, < 58.0.29>= 59.9999.58, < 59.9999.145CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 cPanel versionRun: cat /usr/local/cpanel/version or /var/cpanel/versionAffected if Version falls within any of these ranges: 11.51.9999.98 to 11.52.6.5, 11.54.0.0 to 11.54.0.28, 55.9999.61 to 56.0.33, 57.9999.48 to 58.0.28, or 59.9999.58 to 59.9999.144
-
Locate Mail::SPF scripts in cPanelFind Perl scripts in the cPanel installation directory related to Mail::SPF, typically under /usr/local/cpanel/Cpanel/Mail/Affected if Mail::SPF Perl scripts exist in the cPanel installation directory
-
Inspect shebang lines in Mail::SPF scriptsUse 'head -n1' on each Mail::SPF Perl script found, or grep for '^#!' to view all shebang linesAffected if Any Mail::SPF script is missing a correct Perl shebang (#!/usr/bin/perl) or uses an incorrect interpreter path
A system is affected if it runs a cPanel version within the vulnerable ranges AND contains Mail::SPF scripts with missing or incorrect shebang lines that could cause unintended interpreter execution.
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 data11.52.6.611.54.0.2956.0.34
Upgrade cPanel to version 59.9999.145 or later to obtain the patched Mail::SPF module with correct shebang configuration.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-10793 — 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-2016-10793 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