CVE-2016-6100
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 · uneditedIBM Disposal and Governance Management for IT and IBM Global Retention Policy and Schedule Management, components of IBM Atlas Policy Suite 6.0.3 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM Reference #: 2000771.
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 is a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in IBM Atlas Policy Suite 6.0.3, specifically affecting the IBM Disposal and Governance Management for IT and IBM Global Retention Policy and Schedule Management components. The flaw allows attackers to trick authenticated users into unknowingly submitting malicious requests to the application, exploiting the application's lack of proper CSRF protections such as anti-CSRF tokens or proper origin validation.
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= 6.0= 6.0.1.0= 6.0.1.1= 6.0.1.2= 6.0.1.3= 6.0.1.4= 6.0.1.5= 6.0.1.6= 6.0.1.7= 6.0.2= 6.0.3= 6.0.3.1= 6.0= 6.0.1.0= 6.0.1.1= 6.0.1.2= 6.0.1.3= 6.0.1.4= 6.0.1.5= 6.0.1.6= 6.0.1.7= 6.0.2= 6.0.3= 6.0.3.1CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Identify the installed product versionLocate the IBM Atlas Policy Suite installation and check the version information through the product's about or version management interface, or check the installed packages if using an installerAffected if The installed version matches any of: 6.0, 6.0.1.0, 6.0.1.1, 6.0.1.2, 6.0.1.3, 6.0.1.4, 6.0.1.5, 6.0.1.6, 6.0.1.7, 6.0.2, 6.0.3, or 6.0.3.1
-
Confirm which component is in useDetermine whether IBM Disposal and Governance Management for IT or IBM Global Retention Policy and Schedule Management is deployed and active in your environmentAffected if Either the Disposal and Governance Management for IT or Global Retention Policy and Schedule Management component is enabled and operational
-
Inspect application forms for anti-CSRF tokensExamine the HTML source of state-changing forms (such as those for creating, modifying, or deleting policies) to verify the presence of anti-CSRF tokens or unique request identifiersAffected if The forms lack anti-CSRF tokens or synchronization tokens in their request parameters
-
Check Referer and Origin header validationSubmit a request from an external origin and inspect whether the application rejects requests with missing or mismatched Referer or Origin headersAffected if The application accepts requests without validating the Referer or Origin headers and processes state-changing operations
-
Verify session cookie attributesInspect the session cookies set by the application to check for SameSite attribute configurationAffected if The session cookies lack SameSite attributes or are set with SameSite=None without secure flags
You are affected if you run IBM Atlas Policy Suite versions 6.0 through 6.0.3.1 with either the Disposal and Governance Management for IT or Global Retention Policy and Schedule Management component enabled and the application lacks proper CSRF protections such as anti-CSRF tokens, Referer/Origin validation, or SameSite cookie attributes.
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 anti-CSRF tokens for all state-changing operations, validate the Referer and/or Origin headers, and configure SameSite cookie attributes to prevent cross-site request forgery attacks.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-6100 — 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-2016-6100 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