CVE-2016-5049
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 · uneditedDirectory traversal vulnerability in chat/openattach.aspx in ReadyDesk 9.1 allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via a .. (dot dot) in the SESID parameter in conjunction with a filename in the FNAME parameter.
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 confidenceDirectory traversal vulnerability in ReadyDesk 9.1's chat/openattach.aspx allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files by using '..' sequences in the SESID parameter combined with a filename in the FNAME parameter, enabling unauthorized access to sensitive system files outside the intended directory.
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= 9.1CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Confirm ReadyDesk version installedLocate the ReadyDesk installation directory and check the version information, typically found in the application metadata, About page, or installer records. ReadyDesk version 9.1 is specifically affected.Affected if The installed version is exactly 9.1 (ReadyDesk Readydesk 9.1)
-
Verify vulnerable endpoint existsCheck if the file chat/openattach.aspx exists within the ReadyDesk web application directory structure.Affected if The file chat/openattach.aspx is present in the application
-
Confirm SESID and FNAME parameters are acceptedInspect the chat/openattach.aspx page or its code to verify it accepts SESID and FNAME query parameters.Affected if The page accepts and processes both SESID and FNAME parameters without proper validation
-
Test for directory traversal vulnerabilitySend a crafted request to chat/openattach.aspx with SESID parameter containing '../' sequences (e.g., SESID=..%2F..%2F..%2F) and FNAME pointing to a known file outside the intended upload directory.Affected if The application returns the contents of files outside the intended directory, confirming path traversal is possible
You are affected if ReadyDesk version 9.1 is installed and the chat/openattach.aspx endpoint accepts SESID and FNAME parameters without blocking directory traversal sequences.
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 dataImplement strict input validation on SESID and FNAME parameters to reject path traversal sequences (../) and enforce proper path sanitization to restrict file access to intended directories only.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-5049 — 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-2016-5049 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