CVE-2016-3114
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 · uneditedKallithea before 0.3.2 allows remote authenticated users to edit or delete open pull requests or delete comments by leveraging read access.
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 confidenceKallithea before 0.3.2 contains a broken access control vulnerability where authenticated users with only READ permissions to a repository can edit or delete open pull requests and delete comments. This authorization bypass occurs because the application incorrectly allows modification operations based on read-level access.
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= 0.3.1CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 Kallithea versionLocate and inspect the Kallithea installation to determine the exact version number (e.g., check version file, about page, or admin interface)Affected if The installed version is 0.3.1 exactly (the only affected version listed)
-
Verify READ permission assignmentsAccess the Kallithea admin panel or user management interface and identify repositories where users are granted only READ (or equivalent view-only) permissions without write or admin rightsAffected if Any user账户拥有仅READ权限访问仓库
-
Inventory open pull requestsReview repositories that have READ-only user access and list any open (active or pending) pull requests existing in those repositoriesAffected if 存在具有READ权限用户可访问的开放拉取请求
-
Check for comments on affected repositoriesExamine the repositories accessible to READ-only users for any pull requests that contain commentsAffected if 存在带有评论的拉取请求
-
Confirm read-only user access scopeVerify that the users with READ-only permissions are the same users who could potentially exploit this flaw (they must be authenticated users with valid Kallithea accounts)Affected if 存在已认证的READ权限用户可访问包含开放拉取请求或评论的仓库
用户正在运行Kallithea 0.3.1版本且环境中存在拥有READ权限的已认证用户可访问包含开放拉取请求或评论的仓库。
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 Kallithea version 0.3.2 or later, which contains proper authorization enforcement for pull request and comment operations.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-3114 — 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-2016-3114 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