CVE-2016-2994
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 · uneditedCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in IBM UrbanCode Deploy 6.2.x before 6.2.1.2 allows remote authenticated users to inject arbitrary web script or HTML 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 · high confidenceStored XSS vulnerability in IBM UrbanCode Deploy versions 6.2.x before 6.2.1.2 allows authenticated users to inject arbitrary web script or HTML into unspecified application vectors. When other users view the injected content, the malicious scripts execute in their browsers, potentially stealing session cookies or performing actions on behalf of authenticated users.
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= 6.2.0.0= 6.2.0.1= 6.2.0.2= 6.2.0.201= 6.2.1= 6.2.1.1CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 IBM UrbanCode Deploy installation directoryLocate the UrbanCode Deploy installation path, typically under /opt/ucd or C:\Program Files\ibm\ucd on the server hosting the application.Affected if Installation directory cannot be found - product may not be installed or may be in a non-standard location.
-
Determine installed UrbanCode Deploy versionCheck the version file in the installation directory (typically INSTALL_DIR/var/version.xml or INSTALL_DIR/etc/appversion), or log into the web UI and navigate to the About page (Help > About IBM UrbanCode Deploy).Affected if Version matches 6.2.0.0, 6.2.0.1, 6.2.0.2, 6.2.0.201, 6.2.1, or 6.2.1.1.
-
Confirm the application is accessible and runningVerify the UrbanCode Deploy server is operational by accessing the web UI URL and confirming authentication is possible.Affected if Server is not running or web UI is inaccessible - the stored XSS cannot be triggered in this case.
-
Review application logs for suspicious injection patternsExamine server logs (var/log/ucd*.log in the installation directory) for entries containing HTML tags, script elements, or JavaScript function calls in user-supplied fields.Affected if Logs show evidence of HTML or script tags stored in application fields - indicates possible exploitation.
A user is affected if IBM UrbanCode Deploy version 6.2.0.0 through 6.2.1.1 is installed and the web interface is accessible to authenticated users who can create or modify content.
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 IBM UrbanCode Deploy to version 6.2.1.2 or later to remediate this vulnerability. If immediate upgrade is not possible, implement input validation and output encoding for user-supplied content in affected areas.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-2994 — 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-2016-2994 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