CVE-2016-4845
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 request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability on I-O DATA DEVICE HVL-A2.0, HVL-A3.0, HVL-A4.0, HVL-AT1.0S, HVL-AT2.0, HVL-AT3.0, HVL-AT4.0, HVL-AT2.0A, HVL-AT3.0A, and HVL-AT4.0A devices with firmware before 2.04 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests that delete content.
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 confidenceCSRF vulnerability in I-O DATA HVL-A series network storage devices (firmware < 2.04) allows remote attackers to delete content by tricking authenticated users into visiting malicious pages, hijacking their session authentication.
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= 2.03= 2.03= 2.03= 2.03= 2.03= 2.03= 2.03= 2.03CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Confirm device modelVerify the device is an I-O DATA HVL-A series network storage device (such as HVL-A2.0, HVL-A3.0, HVL-A4.0, HVL-AT1.0S, HVL-AT2.0, HVL-AT2.0A, HVL-AT3.0, or HVL-AT3.0A). This can be found on the device label or in the device information page of the web admin interface.Affected if The device is not an HVL-A series model.
-
Check installed firmware versionLocate the firmware version information in the device web admin interface, typically under a System, Status, or Settings section. Compare the installed version against the affected version 2.03.Affected if The installed firmware version is exactly 2.03.
-
Verify web admin interface accessibilityConfirm the device web admin interface is accessible on the local network. CSRF attacks require the authenticated web interface to be reachable by the attacker.Affected if The web admin interface is accessible and the device is on a network reachable by potential attackers.
-
Determine if admin sessions are activeCheck if the web admin interface permits persistent sessions or cookies that could be hijacked via CSRF. This is inherent to the device web authentication.Affected if The web admin interface uses session-based authentication (cookies or similar) which is the default configuration.
The device is affected if it is an I-O DATA HVL-A series model running firmware version 2.03 with the web admin interface accessible and using session-based authentication.
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 dataUpdate firmware to version 2.04 or later. Until then, avoid clicking untrusted links while logged into the device admin interface and consider network segmentation.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,872.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-4845 — 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-2016-4845 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