SentinelApplication · Netiq

CVE-2016-1605

MEDIUM · 6.5 CVSS v3.0 Published 2016-08-01
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
71/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
Directory traversal vulnerability in the ReportViewServlet servlet in the server in NetIQ Sentinel 7.4.x before 7.4.2 allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via a PREVIEW value for the fileType field.

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 confidence

Directory traversal vulnerability in the ReportViewServlet of NetIQ Sentinel 7.4.x allows remote authenticated attackers to read arbitrary files on the server by supplying a PREVIEW value for the fileType parameter, potentially exposing sensitive system files or configuration data.

MitigationApply vendor patch 7.4.2 or later to address this vulnerability. Until patched, restrict network access to the Sentinel server and implement URL/input validation to reject path traversal sequences in the fileType parameter.

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
SentinelApplication
Affected:= 7.4= 7.4.1

CVSS 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
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify NetIQ Sentinel installed version
    Check the Sentinel installation directory for version information, or query the Sentinel server's about/status page. Common paths include the Sentinel installation directory or check the Sentinel service version through the management console.
    Affected if Installed version is 7.4 or 7.4.1 (unpatched)
  2. Verify ReportViewServlet is exposed
    Locate the ReportViewServlet configuration in the web application deployment descriptor (web.xml) or check if the endpoint is accessible at paths like /sentinel/ReportViewServlet or similar URL patterns under the Sentinel web context.
    Affected if ReportViewServlet is accessible without additional access controls beyond authentication
  3. Check for path traversal filtering on fileType parameter
    Inspect the web application's input validation logic or servlet filters that handle the fileType parameter. Review any web.xml configurations or custom filter implementations for the ReportViewServlet.
    Affected if No filtering exists to reject path traversal sequences (such as ../) in the fileType parameter
  4. Confirm authentication is the only barrier
    Verify that the only requirement to access the ReportViewServlet is valid authentication, with no additional role-based or IP-based restrictions enforced at the application or container level.
    Affected if Any authenticated user can access the ReportViewServlet without further authorization checks on file access requests

A user is affected if they run an unpatched NetIQ Sentinel version 7.4 or 7.4.1 with the ReportViewServlet accessible to authenticated users and without input validation filtering path traversal sequences in the fileType parameter.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply vendor patch 7.4.2 or later to address this vulnerability. Until patched, restrict network access to the Sentinel server and implement URL/input validation to reject path traversal sequences in the fileType parameter.

Fix this in Sentinel Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
13.0 hours of engineering $2,330
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,728.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-1605 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2016-1605 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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