CVE-2016-3969
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 McAfee Email Gateway (MEG) 7.6.x before 7.6.404, when File Filtering is enabled with the action set to ESERVICES:REPLACE, allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via an attachment in a blocked email.
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 confidenceMcAfee Email Gateway 7.6.x before 7.6.404 contains an XSS vulnerability in its File Filtering feature. When File Filtering is enabled with the action set to ESERVICES:REPLACE (which replaces blocked attachment content), the gateway fails to sanitize injected script/HTML from attachment filenames or content, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the context of the email recipient's browser when they view or interact with blocked email attachments.
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= 7.6= 7.6.1= 7.6.2= 7.6.3= 7.6.4CVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 McAfee Email Gateway versionLocate the installed version of McAfee Email Gateway in the product console or system information panelAffected if the installed version is 7.6, 7.6.1, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, or 7.6.4 (any version before 7.6.404)
-
Verify File Filtering feature statusAccess the File Filtering configuration in the McAfee Email Gateway admin interface and determine whether File Filtering is currently enabledAffected if File Filtering is enabled and the product version is in the affected range
-
Examine File Filtering action configurationIn the File Filtering settings, locate the action/response configuration for blocked attachments and check whether the action is set to ESERVICES:REPLACEAffected if the action is configured as ESERVICES:REPLACE (replaces blocked attachment content)
-
Inspect email handling for blocked attachmentsReview how the gateway handles blocked attachments in email traffic - specifically whether replaced content is delivered to recipients without sanitizationAffected if blocked attachments are being replaced and delivered to end users without HTML/script sanitization
If the product version is 7.6 through 7.6.4 AND File Filtering is enabled with the ESERVICES:REPLACE action configured, the environment is vulnerable to reflected XSS via attachment filenames or 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 McAfee Email Gateway to version 7.6.404 or later to obtain the vendor patch. Alternatively, if upgrading is not immediately feasible, disable the ESERVICES:REPLACE action in File Filtering configurations or restrict the File Filtering feature entirely until the patch can be applied.
- Consultation2.0 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 $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-3969 — 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-2016-3969 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