CVE-2016-5653
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 · uneditedMultiple SQL injection vulnerabilities in Misys FusionCapital Opics Plus allow remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the (1) ID or (2) Branch 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 confidenceSQL injection vulnerabilities exist in Misys FusionCapital Opics Plus where the ID and Branch parameters are not properly sanitized, allowing authenticated remote users to inject and execute arbitrary SQL commands.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 Misys FusionCapital Opics Plus installationCheck for Opics Plus installation directories or application files on the system. Look for FusionCapital-related directories, or check system inventory/asset management tools for this application.Affected if The application is installed on the system.
-
Identify accessible web interfacesScan for web services running on common ports (80, 443, 8080, 8443) that respond with Opics Plus or Misys FusionCapital branding. Check web server configurations and reverse proxy settings.Affected if Opics Plus web interfaces are exposed and accessible to network users.
-
Locate endpoints using ID and Branch parametersReview application traffic or proxy logs for requests containing 'ID' or 'Branch' parameters. Examine URL patterns, form submissions, and API endpoints in the web application.Affected if Requests to the application include ID or Branch parameters without parameterized query handling.
-
Verify authentication is enforcedConfirm that the Opics Plus application requires authentication for access. Test whether unauthenticated requests to ID/Branch parameter endpoints are rejected or redirected to login.Affected if The application authenticates users before allowing access to vulnerable functionality.
-
Review database query handlingExamine application logs, database query logs, or web application firewall (WAF) logs for suspicious SQL syntax in ID or Branch parameter values. Look for SQL meta-characters like quotes, UNION, or semicolons in these parameters.Affected if ID or Branch parameter values are passed directly to database queries without sanitization.
If Misys FusionCapital Opics Plus is installed with accessible web interfaces that handle ID or Branch parameters, the environment is affected since all versions contain the SQL injection vulnerability.
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 parameterized queries or prepared statements for all database queries, and apply proper input validation on the ID and Branch parameters to prevent SQL injection.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-5653 — 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-2016-5653 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