dbcve.org
Enterprise Linux DesktopOperating system · Redhat

CVE-2016-5416

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.0 Published 2017-06-08
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
389 Directory Server in Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop 6 through 7, Red Hat Enterprise Linux HPC Node 6 through 7, Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server 6 through 7, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation 6 through 7 allows remote attackers to read the default Access Control Instructions.

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 confidence

This is an information disclosure vulnerability in 389 Directory Server where remote attackers can read the default Access Control Instructions (ACI). ACI defines permissions and access controls in the directory. Exposure of these settings allows attackers to understand the permission structure, potentially aiding further attacks.

MitigationApply the Red Hat security updates for CVE-2016-5416. If immediate patching is not feasible, restrict network access to the directory server using firewall rules or network segmentation to limit exposure to untrusted networks.

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
Enterprise Linux DesktopOperating system
Affected:= 6.0= 7.0
Enterprise Linux Hpc NodeOperating system
Affected:= 6.0= 7.0
Enterprise Linux ServerOperating system
Affected:= 6.0= 7.0
Enterprise Linux WorkstationOperating system
Affected:= 6.0= 7.0

CVSS 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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Verify 389 Directory Server is installed
    Check if the 389-ds-base package is installed using: rpm -qa | grep 389-ds-base
    Affected if The package is not installed or the package name differs from 389-ds-base
  2. Determine installed package version
    Run: rpm -q --queryformat '%{VERSION}' 389-ds-base to get the version number, then compare against Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.0 and 7.0
    Affected if The installed version corresponds to RHEL 6.0 or RHEL 7.0 and falls within the affected range
  3. Confirm the server is running and network accessible
    Check if the directory server process is running: ps aux | grep ns-slapd and verify it is bound to a network interface (not localhost only)
    Affected if The server is running and bound to a non-localhost interface, making it remotely accessible
  4. Check if anonymous or unauthenticated access can read directory entries
    Perform an anonymous LDAP search against the server for an entry that would contain ACI, for example: ldapsearch -h <server_ip> -p 389 -b 'cn=anonymous' or test with no bind credentials to see if directory data is returned
    Affected if The server returns directory entries (including ACI-related entries) without requiring authentication

A user is affected if 389-ds-base is installed on RHEL 6.0 or 7.0, the server is network-accessible, and anonymous or unauthenticated users can read Access Control Instruction entries from the directory.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply the Red Hat security updates for CVE-2016-5416. If immediate patching is not feasible, restrict network access to the directory server using firewall rules or network segmentation to limit exposure to untrusted networks.

Fix this in Enterprise Linux Desktop Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
7.0 hours of engineering $1,240
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-5416 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2016-5416 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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