dbcve.org
Jboss Operations NetworkApplication · Redhat

CVE-2016-6330

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.0 Published 2016-09-27
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
The server in Red Hat JBoss Operations Network (JON), when SSL authentication is not configured for JON server / agent communication, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted HTTP request, related to message deserialization. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2016-3737.

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 confidence

JBoss Operations Network server contains a deserialization vulnerability allowing remote code execution via crafted HTTP requests. This flaw exists specifically when SSL authentication is not configured for server-to-agent communication, and represents an incomplete fix from CVE-2016-3737.

MitigationEnable and enforce SSL authentication for all JON server-to-agent communications to prevent unauthenticated deserialization attacks.

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
Jboss Operations NetworkApplication
Affected:= 3.0= 3.0.1= 3.1= 3.1.1= 3.1.2= 3.1.4= 3.2.0= 3.2.1= 3.2.2= 3.2.3= 3.3.1= 3.3.2

CVSS 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
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify JBoss Operations Network installation and version
    Locate the JON server installation directory and check the version file or product metadata. Common locations include /opt/jboss/ or installation-specific paths. Use commands like 'rpm -qi jboss-operations-network' or inspect version.info files in the installation root.
    Affected if The installed version matches any of: 3.0, 3.0.1, 3.1, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.4, 3.2.0, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.3.1, or 3.3.2
  2. Verify SSL configuration for server-to-agent communication
    Examine the JON server configuration files related to agent communication, typically found in the conf or config directory of the JON installation. Look for SSL-related settings in server-to-agent communication parameters, agent connector configurations, or transport layer security settings.
    Affected if SSL authentication is disabled, not configured, or set to optional for server-to-agent communication channels
  3. Check agent connector configuration files
    Inspect the agent connector configuration, often named connector-config.xml, agent-config.xml, or similar in the JON server configuration directory. Search for attributes such as 'ssl-enabled', 'use-ssl', or 'transport' that control encryption.
    Affected if The connector configuration shows SSL is disabled or missing for the agent communication endpoint
  4. Review server.xml or equivalent for SSL settings
    If JON uses a Tomcat-style server.xml or similar web container configuration, examine it for SSL connector definitions. Verify whether the agent communication port uses SSL-based connectors or plain-text connections.
    Affected if The agent communication port (typically 16162 or similar) is configured without SSL/TLS encryption

You are affected if the installed JON version is one of the listed versions AND SSL authentication is not configured or is disabled for server-to-agent communication.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Enable and enforce SSL authentication for all JON server-to-agent communications to prevent unauthenticated deserialization attacks.

Fix this in Jboss Operations Network Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
9.0 hours of engineering $1,600
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-6330 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2016-6330 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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