CVE-2016-5968
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 · uneditedThe Replay Server in IBM Tealeaf Customer Experience 8.x before 8.7.1.8847 FP10, 8.8.x before 8.8.0.9049 FP9, 9.0.0 and 9.0.1 before 9.0.1.1117 FP5, 9.0.1A before 9.0.1.5108 FP5, 9.0.2 before 9.0.2.1223 FP3, and 9.0.2A before 9.0.2.5224 FP3 allows remote attackers to conduct SSRF attacks via unspecified vectors.
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 is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the Replay Server component of IBM Tealeaf Customer Experience. The vulnerability allows remote unauthenticated attackers to coerce the Replay Server into making arbitrary HTTP requests to internal or external resources, potentially bypassing network boundaries.
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<= 8.6= 8.7= 8.8= 9.0.0= 9.0.0a= 9.0.1= 9.0.1a= 9.0.2= 9.0.2aCVSS 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
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/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.
-
Verify Tealeaf Replay Server component is installedCheck for the presence of Tealeaf Replay Server in the installed components. Look for directories named 'ReplayServer' or similar under the Tealeaf installation path, or check Windows Services/Unix init scripts for a 'Tealeaf Replay Server' or 'ReplayServer' service.Affected if The Replay Server component is present and running on the system
-
Determine installed Tealeaf Customer Experience versionLocate the Tealeaf installation directory and look for a version file, about dialog, or check registry entries (on Windows) that indicate the exact version number. Common locations include the main Tealeaf installation folder or within product documentation.Affected if The installed version matches <= 8.6, 8.7, 8.8, 9.0.0, 9.0.0a, 9.0.1, 9.0.1a, 9.0.2, or 9.0.2a
-
Confirm Replay Server is exposed on the networkIdentify the port used by Replay Server (typically configurable, default may be 8080, 8090, or similar) and verify if the service is listening on a network interface accessible to unauthenticated remote attackers. Check firewall rules and binding configuration.Affected if Replay Server listens on a network-accessible interface and is reachable without authentication from untrusted networks
-
Check for recent access logs indicating SSRF activityReview Replay Server access logs for suspicious patterns such as internal IP addresses (127.0.0.1, 10.x.x.x, 192.168.x.x), unusual HTTP headers, or requests to unexpected internal resources.Affected if Logs show requests to internal resources or unexpected external domains that were not initiated by legitimate users
You are affected if the Replay Server component is installed and the installed Tealeaf version matches the affected version list, particularly if the service is network-accessible.
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 dataApply the vendor-supplied patches for the specific FP (Fix Pack) versions corresponding to each affected release line (8.7.1.8847 FP10, 8.8.0.9049 FP9, 9.0.1.1117 FP5, 9.0.1.5108 FP5, 9.0.2.1223 FP3, or 9.0.2.5224 FP3). Additionally, implement network segmentation and restrict outbound connectivity from the Replay Server to minimize impact of any SSRF exploitation.
- 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-2016-5968 — 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-2016-5968 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