CVE-2016-5714
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 · uneditedPuppet Enterprise 2015.3.3 and 2016.x before 2016.4.0, and Puppet Agent 1.3.6 through 1.7.0 allow remote attackers to bypass a host whitelist protection mechanism and execute arbitrary code on Puppet nodes via vectors related to command validation, aka "Puppet Execution Protocol (PXP) Command Whitelist Validation Vulnerability."
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 confidenceThis vulnerability allows remote attackers to bypass the PXP (Puppet Execution Protocol) command whitelist validation mechanism in Puppet Enterprise and Puppet Agent. By exploiting command validation flaws, attackers can execute arbitrary code on managed Puppet nodes. The vulnerability affects Puppet Enterprise 2015.3.3 and 2016.x before 2016.4.0, and Puppet Agent versions 1.3.6 through 1.7.0.
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= 2015.3.3= 2016.1.1= 2016.1.2= 2016.2.0= 2016.2.1>= 1.3.6, <= 1.7.0CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/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.
-
Check Puppet Enterprise versionRun 'puppet --version' on the Puppet Master server, or inspect the installed package version via the system package manager (e.g., 'rpm -q puppet-enterprise' or 'dpkg -l puppet-enterprise')Affected if The version is 2015.3.3, 2016.1.1, 2016.1.2, 2016.2.0, or 2016.2.1 (or any 2016.x version below 2016.4.0)
-
Check Puppet Agent versionRun 'puppet --version' on the managed node, or inspect the installed package version via the system package manager (e.g., 'rpm -q puppet-agent' or 'dpkg -l puppet-agent')Affected if The version is between 1.3.6 and 1.7.0 inclusive
-
Verify pxp-agent service is runningCheck if the pxp-agent service is enabled and running on the node by running 'systemctl status pxp-agent' (or 'service pxp-agent status')Affected if The pxp-agent service is active - this is the PXP component that contains the vulnerable command whitelist validation logic
-
Check PXP configuration in puppet.confInspect the [agent] section of puppet.conf for the 'pxp_enabled' setting, typically located at /etc/puppetlabs/puppet/puppet.conf or /etc/puppet/puppet.confAffected if pxp_enabled is set to true (or not explicitly set to false, defaulting to true in affected versions)
The node is affected if Puppet Enterprise or Puppet Agent is running a version within the affected ranges AND the pxp-agent service is active with PXP enabled.
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 dataUpgrade Puppet Enterprise to version 2016.4.0 or later, and upgrade Puppet Agent to version 1.7.1 or later to receive the patched command whitelist validation logic.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-5714 — 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-2016-5714 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