CVE-2016-6425
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 · uneditedCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Cisco Unified Intelligence Center (CUIC) 8.5.4 through 9.1(1), as used in Unified Contact Center Express 10.0(1) through 11.0(1), allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via a crafted URL, aka Bug IDs CSCuy75020 and CSCuy81652.
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 confidenceReflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Cisco Unified Intelligence Center (CUIC) web interface allows remote unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary HTML or JavaScript via a crafted URL parameter. The vulnerability stems from insufficient input validation in URL handling, allowing the attacker's script to be reflected back to the user's browser.
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= 10.0\(1\)= 10.5\(1\)= 10.6\(1\)= 11.0\(1\)= 8.5.4= 9.0\(2\)= 9.1\(1\)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
- 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 installed CUIC or Unified Contact Center Express versionAccess the admin web interface of Cisco Unified Intelligence Center or Unified Contact Center Express and navigate to the About or System Information page to view the software version. Alternatively, use the CLI and run 'show version' or 'utils system version' command if available.Affected if The displayed version matches 8.5.4, 9.0(2), 9.1(1) for CUIC, or 10.0(1), 10.5(1), 10.6(1), 11.0(1) for Unified Contact Center Express.
-
Verify the web interface is accessibleConfirm that the Cisco Unified Intelligence Center or Unified Contact Center Express web interface is reachable on the network by attempting to access the login page via HTTPS or HTTP.Affected if The web interface is exposed and reachable, making the XSS vulnerability potentially exploitable.
-
Check for applied security patch CSCuy75020 or CSCuy81652In the Cisco admin interface, look for installed software updates or patches. In the CLI, check the patch status using 'show patch status' or 'utils cup patch list' if applicable. Alternatively, review the system logs for evidence that the security patch has been installed.Affected if No patch for CSCuy75020 or CSCuy81652 is installed, meaning the security update addressing this XSS vulnerability has not been applied.
-
Review URL parameter handlingIf you have access to test the application, craft a test URL with a benign script payload in a parameter (for example, ?param=<script>alert('test')</script>) and observe whether the script is reflected back in the response without sanitization. In a production environment, review HTTP access logs for unusual URL patterns with script tags.Affected if URL parameters containing HTML or script tags are reflected in the response without proper encoding or validation.
The environment is affected if Cisco Unified Intelligence Center version 8.5.4, 9.0(2), or 9.1(1) OR Cisco Unified Contact Center Express version 10.0(1), 10.5(1), 10.6(1), or 11.0(1) is installed, the web interface is accessible, and security patch CSCuy75020/CSCuy81652 has not been applied.
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 Cisco security patch for CSCuy75020/CSCuy81652 to affected CUIC versions 8.5.4 through 9.1(1) and corresponding Unified Contact Center Express versions 10.0(1) through 11.0(1). As a compensating control, implement Content Security Policy (CSP) headers and validate URL parameters server-side before rendering.
- 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-2016-6425 — 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-2016-6425 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