CVE-2016-5798
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in Fatek Automation PM Designer V3 Version 2.1.2.2, and Automation FV Designer Version 1.2.8.0. By sending additional valid packets, an attacker could trigger a stack-based buffer overflow and cause a crash. Also, a malicious attacker can trigger a remote buffer overflow on the Fatek Communication Server.
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 · moderate confidenceThis CVE describes stack-based buffer overflow vulnerabilities in Fatek Automation PM Designer V3 (v2.1.2.2) and Automation FV Designer (v1.2.8.0), plus a remote buffer overflow in Fatek Communication Server. The attack vector involves sending specially crafted 'additional valid packets' that trigger overflow conditions, leading to denial of service (crash). The vulnerability stems from insufficient bounds checking when processing network packets in the protocol implementation.
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= 1.2.8.0= 2.1.2.2CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Identify installed Fatek design softwareCheck program directories for 'Fatek Automation FV Designer' or 'Fatek Automation PM Designer' folders, typically found in C:\Program Files\Fatek or C:\Program Files (x86)\FatekAffected if Either FV Designer or PM Designer is installed on the system
-
Verify installed software versionOpen the respective designer application and navigate to Help > About, or locate the executable file properties (right-click on FVDesigner.exe or PMDesigner.exe and view Details/Version tab)Affected if Version matches 1.2.8.0 for FV Designer or 2.1.2.2 for PM Designer
-
Locate Fatek Communication ServerAffected if Communication Server component is present and running on the system
-
Assess network exposure of Communication ServerUse command 'netstat -an | findstr :500' or similar port scan to identify if port 500 (default Fatek protocol port) is listening on external interfaces, check Windows Firewall rules for inbound allowed rules on Fatek portsAffected if Communication Server is bound to a network-accessible IP address and port 500 is open to untrusted networks
A system is affected if either FV Designer v1.2.8.0 or PM Designer v2.1.2.2 is installed AND the Fatek Communication Server component is network-accessible, allowing specially crafted packets to reach the vulnerable protocol handler.
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 dataIsolate Fatek devices on a restricted network segment, implement strict access controls on the Communication Server (port/interface filtering), and apply any vendor patches if available. Consider adding IDS/IPS monitoring for anomalous packet patterns.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $14,016.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-5798 — 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-2016-5798 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