CVE-2016-6027
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 Configuration Manager in IBM Sterling Secure Proxy (SSP) 3.4.2 before 3.4.2.0 iFix 8 and 3.4.3 before 3.4.3.0 iFix 1 does not enable the HSTS protection mechanism, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain sensitive information or modify data by leveraging use of HTTP.
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 confidenceThe Configuration Manager in IBM Sterling Secure Proxy versions 3.4.2 before iFix 8 and 3.4.3 before iFix 1 does not enable HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), a web security policy mechanism that forces browsers to communicate exclusively over HTTPS. Without HSTS, users may connect over HTTP, enabling man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept sensitive information or modify data in transit.
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= 3.4.2.0= 3.4.3.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/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.
-
Identify the installed version of IBM Sterling Secure ProxyLocate and inspect the version information for your IBM Sterling Secure Proxy installation, typically found in the product's about or version details in the Configuration Manager interface or in the installation directory documentation.Affected if The installed version is 3.4.2.0 or 3.4.3.0 without the respective iFixes applied.
-
Verify the Configuration Manager web interface URLCheck the URL used to access the Configuration Manager web console - determine whether it uses HTTP (port 8080/80) or HTTPS (port 8443/443).Affected if The Configuration Manager is accessible over HTTP (http://) instead of only HTTPS (https://).
-
Check HSTS header configurationInspect the HTTP response headers from the Configuration Manager web interface for the presence of the 'Strict-Transport-Security' header.Affected if The 'Strict-Transport-Security' header is absent from HTTP responses served by the Configuration Manager.
-
Confirm HSTS is not enabled in Configuration Manager settingsReview the Configuration Manager security settings or configuration files to determine if HSTS has been explicitly enabled.Affected if HSTS is disabled or not configured in the Configuration Manager settings.
You are affected if your IBM Sterling Secure Proxy version is 3.4.2.0 or 3.4.3.0 and the Configuration Manager does not enforce HSTS, allowing browser connections over HTTP.
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 IBM iFixes (3.4.2.0 iFix 8 or 3.4.3.0 iFix 1) to enable HSTS protection in the Configuration Manager, or manually configure HSTS headers if patching is not immediately feasible.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-6027 — 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-2016-6027 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