RangerApplication · Apache
CVE-2016-6815
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 · uneditedIn Apache Ranger before 0.6.2, users with "keyadmin" role should not be allowed to change password for users with "admin" role.
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 broken access control vulnerability in Apache Ranger where users with the 'keyadmin' role could change passwords for users with the 'admin' role. This allows privilege escalation - a lower-privileged keyadmin user can take over an admin account by resetting its password. The fix requires proper role-based access control (RBAC) enforcement in the password change functionality.
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
RangerApplication
= 0.4.0= 0.5.0= 0.5.1= 0.5.2= 0.5.3= 0.6.0= 0.6.1CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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 Apache Ranger versionCheck the Ranger version file or UI: look for version.info, pom.xml in the installation directory, or the 'About' page in the Ranger admin UIAffected if The installed version is 0.4.0, 0.5.0, 0.5.1, 0.5.2, 0.5.3, 0.6.0, or 0.6.1
-
Verify keyadmin role existsLog into Ranger admin UI and navigate to 'Users' or 'Access Manager' to list all defined roles, or query the users table in the Ranger database for role assignmentsAffected if Users with the 'keyadmin' role are present in the system
-
Confirm admin role users existIn the Ranger admin UI, check the Users page or query the database for users assigned the 'ROLE_ADMIN' roleAffected if Users with 'admin' role exist alongside keyadmin users
-
Test password change behavior for privilege escalationAs a user with keyadmin role, attempt to use the password reset or change function to modify the password of a user who has the admin role. In the UI, this is typically under 'Users' -> select user -> 'Reset Password' or similar functionAffected if The keyadmin user can successfully change the password of an admin role user without receiving an authorization error
You are affected if you run Apache Ranger versions 0.4.0 through 0.6.1 and have users with both keyadmin and admin roles present, where keyadmin users can reset admin user passwords.
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 dataUpgrade to Apache Ranger 0.6.2 or later which enforces proper role restrictions preventing keyadmin users from modifying admin user passwords.
Fix this in Ranger
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-6815 — 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-2016-6815 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