BotanApplication · Botan Project

CVE-2016-6879

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.0 Published 2017-04-10
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
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 X509_Certificate::allowed_usage function in botan 1.11.x before 1.11.31 might allow attackers to have unspecified impact by leveraging a call with more than one Key_Usage set in the enum value.

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 · moderate confidence

In Botan 1.11.x before 1.11.31, the X509_Certificate::allowed_usage function contains a logic flaw when handling Key_Usage extensions that have more than one usage flag set in the enum value. This likely causes incorrect bitmask comparisons when validating certificate usage constraints, potentially allowing certificates to be accepted for unauthorized purposes.

MitigationUpgrade Botan TLS library to version 1.11.31 or later to obtain the fixed implementation of X509_Certificate::allowed_usage.

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
BotanApplication
Affected:= 1.11.0= 1.11.1= 1.11.2= 1.11.3= 1.11.4= 1.11.5= 1.11.6= 1.11.7= 1.11.8= 1.11.9= 1.11.10= 1.11.11

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
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

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

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

  1. Identify Botan library installation and version
    Locate the Botan library in your environment and determine its version number. Common methods include checking library files, build artifacts, package manager listings, or inspecting version headers in the Botan source code if compiled locally.
    Affected if The installed version is 1.11.x and falls within the range 1.11.0 through 1.11.11 (or any version before 1.11.31)
  2. Locate X509_Certificate::allowed_usage usage in code
    Search your codebase for calls to the X509_Certificate::allowed_usage method or references to X509 certificate validation logic that checks Key_Usage extensions.
    Affected if Your application uses X509_Certificate::allowed_usage to validate certificate Key_Usage extensions
  3. Determine if Key_Usage extensions with multiple flags are processed
    Review your certificate validation flow to identify whether certificates with Key_Usage extensions containing more than one usage flag (such as digitalSignature + keyEncipherment) are being validated against usage constraints.
    Affected if Your environment processes certificates that have Key_Usage extensions with multiple bits set in the extension value
  4. Verify bitmask comparison behavior in certificate validation
    If possible, inspect the Botan library source code for the X509_Certificate::allowed_usage implementation to confirm whether the bitmask comparison logic uses a single-bit test (like (usage & flag) == flag) rather than a proper multi-bit test.
    Affected if The installed Botan library contains the flawed bitmask comparison logic in X509_Certificate::allowed_usage

You are affected if your environment uses Botan TLS library versions 1.11.0 through 1.11.11 (or any version before 1.11.31) and performs X509 certificate validation with Key_Usage extensions that contain multiple usage flags.

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

Upgrade Botan TLS library to version 1.11.31 or later to obtain the fixed implementation of X509_Certificate::allowed_usage.

Fix this in Botan Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,040
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,864.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-6879 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2016-6879 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