CVE-2016-6537
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 · uneditedAVer Information EH6108H+ devices with firmware X9.03.24.00.07l store passwords in a cleartext base64 format and require cleartext credentials in HTTP Cookie headers, which allows context-dependent attacks to obtain sensitive information by reading these strings.
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 AVer Information EH6108H+ video capture device with firmware X9.03.24.00.07l stores user passwords in a reversible base64-encoded format and transmits credentials in cleartext within HTTP Cookie headers. An attacker able to intercept HTTP traffic or access stored configuration can easily decode the base64 strings to obtain plaintext passwords, enabling unauthorized access to the device.
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= x9.03.24.00.07lCVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 device modelLog into the device web interface or check the physical device label to confirm the model is EH6108H+Affected if The device is not an EH6108H+ model (different models are not affected by this specific CVE)
-
Check the installed firmware versionAccess the device firmware version in the web interface (usually under System > Device Info or similar), or use the device's API/serial console to query the firmware versionAffected if The firmware version is exactly X9.03.24.00.07l (only this version is listed as affected)
-
Verify if HTTP (non-encrypted) access is enabledAttempt to access the device using http:// (instead of https://) or check the device network settings for the HTTP/HTTPS configurationAffected if HTTP access is enabled and credentials are transmitted in cleartext within HTTP Cookie headers (the vulnerability requires this cleartext transmission)
-
Inspect stored configuration for encoded passwordsIf the device allows configuration export or backup, examine the stored configuration files for password fields; check if they appear as base64-encoded stringsAffected if User passwords are stored in base64-encoded format that can be trivially decoded to plaintext
A user is affected if they have an EH6108H+ device running firmware version X9.03.24.00.07l with HTTP access enabled, allowing cleartext credential transmission or reversible base64-encoded password storage.
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 dataContact AVer Information for patched firmware; until available, enforce TLS/HTTPS for all device communications, place devices behind firewalls, and monitor for unauthorized access attempts.
- 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-2016-6537 — 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-2016-6537 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