CVE-2016-2936
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 · uneditedIBM BigFix Remote Control before 9.1.3 uses cleartext storage for unspecified passwords, which allows local users to obtain sensitive information via unknown 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 confidenceIBM BigFix Remote Control versions prior to 9.1.3 store passwords in cleartext (unencrypted) format, allowing local users with file system access to potentially retrieve sensitive credentials.
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<= 9.1.2CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 the installed IBM BigFix Remote Control versionOpen the IBM BigFix Remote Control application or check the program files directory for version information. On Windows, you can also check Add/Remove Programs or the Windows Registry for the installed version.Affected if The version is 9.1.2 or earlier (any version prior to 9.1.3).
-
Locate password or configuration storage filesSearch the IBM BigFix Remote Control installation directory for files that may contain stored credentials, such as configuration files, password files, or user databases. Common file types to look for include .cfg, .xml, .ini, .dat, or database files within the installation folder.Affected if Password or credential files exist in the installation directory.
-
Examine stored credentials for encryptionOpen the identified password or configuration files using a text editor or binary viewer. Inspect whether the password fields contain plaintext strings or encrypted/hashed values. Cleartext passwords will appear as readable alphanumeric strings.Affected if Passwords are stored in readable, unencrypted plaintext format within the files.
-
Verify file system permissions on sensitive filesCheck the access permissions on the configuration and password files. Right-click the files, go to Properties, and review the Users or Groups that have Read access. Determine if unprivileged local accounts can access these files.Affected if Standard user accounts or unprivileged local users have Read access to files containing passwords.
A user is affected if IBM BigFix Remote Control version is 9.1.2 or earlier AND password storage files contain unencrypted plaintext credentials accessible to local users.
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 to IBM BigFix Remote Control 9.1.3 or later. Review and restrict file system permissions on directories containing configuration or password files to limit local access.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-2936 — 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-2016-2936 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