Cloud Network Automation ProvisionerApplication · Cisco
CVE-2016-1393
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 · uneditedSQL injection vulnerability in Cisco Cloud Network Automation Provisioner (CNAP) 1.0 and 1.1 allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary SQL commands via a crafted URL, aka Bug ID CSCuy72175.
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 confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in Cisco Cloud Network Automation Provisioner (CNAP) versions 1.0 and 1.1 allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary SQL commands via a crafted URL parameter. The vulnerability exists in the web interface handling of URL parameters without proper input sanitization or parameterized queries.
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
Cloud Network Automation ProvisionerApplication
= 1.0= 1.1CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/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 Cisco CNAP installationCheck your environment for the presence of Cisco Cloud Network Automation Provisioner software. This may be visible in installed applications, system inventory, or network documentation.Affected if Cisco CNAP version 1.0 or 1.1 is installed in the environment
-
Verify CNAP version numberAccess the CNAP administrative interface or check the software version through the system's built-in version reporting mechanism (typically available in the web UI footer, about page, or CLI show command).Affected if The installed version is exactly 1.0 or exactly 1.1
-
Confirm web interface is accessibleAttempt to reach the CNAP web interface over HTTP/HTTPS from a network location. Check if the management portal is exposed on expected ports.Affected if The CNAP web interface is reachable over the network
-
Verify authentication is configuredCheck whether authentication is enabled for the CNAP web interface. This may involve reviewing the authentication settings in the web UI or configuration files.Affected if Authentication is enabled (the SQL injection requires authenticated access, so this is necessary but not sufficient for exploitation)
You are affected if Cisco Cloud Network Automation Provisioner version 1.0 or 1.1 is installed and its web interface is network-accessible with authentication enabled.
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 dataApply the vendor patch from Cisco for bug ID CSCuy72175. As an interim control, restrict network access to CNAP management interfaces to trusted IP addresses and ensure authentication credentials are strong to limit exposure.
Fix this in Cloud Network Automation Provisioner
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $3,392.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-1393 — 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-2016-1393 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