CVE-2016-2291
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 · uneditedPro-face GP-Pro EX EX-ED before 4.05.000, PFXEXEDV before 4.05.000, PFXEXEDLS before 4.05.000, and PFXEXGRPLS before 4.05.000 allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds read) via unspecified vectors.
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 confidencePro-face GP-Pro EX HMI software versions before 4.05.000 contain an out-of-bounds read vulnerability that can be exploited remotely to execute arbitrary code or cause denial of service. The vulnerability affects multiple product variants (EX-ED, PFXEXEDV, PFXEXEDLS, PFXEXGRPLS).
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<= 4.0.4<= 4.0.4<= 4.0.4<= 4.0.4CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Confirm GP-Pro EX installationLook for GP-Pro EX HMI software in the system is installed programs or program files directoryAffected if GP-Pro EX is found on the system
-
Identify product variantCheck the specific GP-Pro EX variant installed (EX-ED, PFXEXEDV, PFXEXEDLS, or PFXEXGRPLS) - this information is typically visible in the software about or help menu, or in the installation directory nameAffected if The variant is one of: EX-ED, PFXEXEDV, PFXEXEDLS, or PFXEXGRPLS
-
Locate version informationFind the installed version number - this is usually shown in the software is About or Help section, or can be found in the program is version propertiesAffected if Unable to determine version number
-
Compare version to affected rangeCheck if the installed version is 4.0.4 or lower (versions before 4.05.000 are affected)Affected if Installed version is 4.0.4 or lower, or any version below 4.05.000
The system is affected if GP-Pro EX software with variant EX-ED, PFXEXEDV, PFXEXEDLS, or PFXEXGRPLS is installed and the version is 4.0.4 or lower.
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 dataUpgrade all affected GP-Pro EX installations to version 4.05.000 or later. Until patched, restrict network access to HMI systems and monitor for exploitation attempts given the remote attack vector.
- 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-2016-2291 — 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-2016-2291 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