CVE-2016-4791
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 · uneditedThe administrative user interface in Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) 8.2 before 8.2r1, 8.1 before 8.1r2, 8.0 before 8.0r9, and 7.4 before 7.4r13.4 allows remote administrators to enumerate files, read arbitrary files, and conduct server side request forgery (SSRF) attacks 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 confidenceThe administrative user interface in Pulse Connect Secure versions 8.2 before 8.2r1, 8.1 before 8.1r2, 8.0 before 8.0r9, and 7.4 before 7.4r13.4 contains multiple flaws allowing authenticated remote administrators to enumerate files on the system, read arbitrary files via path traversal, and conduct Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) attacks to target internal infrastructure.
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= 8.1= 8.2= 8.0= 8.1r1.0= 7.4CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/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 product and versionAccess the administrative login page of the web interface and check the version displayed on the login page or in the system status/diagnostics section, or query the system via CLI if availableAffected if The product is Pulse Connect Secure or Ivanti Connect Secure and the version is 8.2 before 8.2r1, 8.1 before 8.1r2, 8.0 before 8.0r9, or 7.4 before 7.4r13.4
-
Verify admin interface is reachableConfirm the administrative web interface (typically on port 443/8443) is accessible from network locations that could be exploitedAffected if The admin interface is exposed to untrusted or external network segments
-
Check for suspicious admin activityReview admin access logs and audit trails for unusual file access patterns, path traversal attempts (such as ../../../etc/passwd), or unexpected outbound requests to internal IP rangesAffected if Logs show file enumeration attempts, path traversal patterns, or anomalous internal network requests originating from admin sessions
You are affected if you are running Pulse Connect Secure or Ivanti Connect Secure versions 8.2 before 8.2r1, 8.1 before 8.1r2, 8.0 before 8.0r9, or 7.4 before 7.4r13.4 and the administrative web interface is accessible to authenticated administrators who could exploit the path traversal or SSRF flaws
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 dataApply vendor-provided patches to upgrade to versions 8.2r1, 8.1r2, 8.0r9, 7.4r13.4 or later. If immediate patching is not feasible, restrict administrative interface access to trusted IP ranges via firewall rules or VPN access controls.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-4791 — 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-2016-4791 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