CVE-2016-6123
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 Kenexa LMS on Cloud 13.1 and 13.2 - 13.2.4 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session.
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 confidenceIBM Kenexa LMS on Cloud versions 13.1 through 13.2.4 contains a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that allows authenticated users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code into the Web UI. This occurs due to insufficient input sanitization, potentially enabling session hijacking or credentials disclosure through a trusted session.
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= 13.1= 13.2= 13.2.2= 13.2.3= 13.2.4CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 Kenexa LMS versionAccess the application admin panel or About section to locate the product version number. Look for version information typically found under Help, About, or System Administration menus in the Kenexa LMS interface.Affected if The version displayed is 13.1, 13.2, 13.2.2, 13.2.3, or 13.2.4 - these are the known affected versions.
-
Confirm you are using the Cloud deploymentVerify the deployment model is IBM Kenexa LMS On Cloud (SaaS/hosted) rather than an on-premise installation.Affected if The deployment is specifically the On Cloud (hosted) variant of Kenexa LMS.
-
Check authentication statusDetermine whether your user account has authenticated access to the LMS application.Affected if You have valid credentials and an active authenticated session with the Kenexa LMS application.
-
Test for XSS in user input fieldsUsing an authenticated session, submit a benign XSS test payload such as <script>alert(1)</script> in common user-input fields like profile fields, search boxes, or custom form inputs. Observe if the payload is executed or reflected unescaped in the response.Affected if The submitted JavaScript payload executes in your browser or appears literally in the page source without HTML encoding.
Your environment is affected if you are running IBM Kenexa LMS On Cloud versions 13.1 through 13.2.4 and can confirm XSS execution occurs in user input fields within the application.
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 proper input validation and output encoding for all user-supplied data rendered in the Web UI. Apply context-specific escaping when reflecting user input back to the browser.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-6123 — 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-2016-6123 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