CVE-2016-7071
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 · uneditedIt was found that the CloudForms before 5.6.2.2, and 5.7.0.7 did not properly apply permissions controls to VM IDs passed by users. A remote, authenticated attacker could use this flaw to execute arbitrary VMs on systems managed by CloudForms if they know the ID of the VM.
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 an Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability in CloudForms where the application fails to validate user permissions on VM IDs provided by users. An authenticated remote attacker can manipulate VM IDs in requests to control or execute arbitrary VMs managed by CloudForms without proper authorization checks.
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< 5.6.2.2>= 5.7.0.0, < 5.7.0.7= 4.1CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Locate CloudForms version in the UILog into the CloudForms web interface and navigate to the About page (typically under the Help or Settings menu). Record the version number displayed.Affected if The displayed version is 4.1, OR is less than 5.6.2.2, OR is 5.7.0.0 through 5.7.0.6
-
Retrieve version via APIIf API access is available, send a GET request to the /api version endpoint (e.g., https://your-cf-server/api) and examine the response for the version field.Affected if The API returns a version matching the affected ranges listed above
-
Check installed package version via CLIIf you have shell access to the CloudForms appliance, run commands such as 'rpm -qa | grep cfme' or check /var/www/miq/vmdb/VERSION file to identify the installed package version.Affected if The installed package version falls within the vulnerable ranges: < 5.6.2.2, 5.7.0.0-5.7.0.6, or exactly 4.1
-
Identify if remote API access is enabledVerify whether the CloudForms API is exposed and accessible to non-admin users by checking the appliance settings and authentication configuration.Affected if The API is accessible to authenticated users and the CloudForms version is within the affected ranges listed
You are affected if your installed CloudForms or CloudForms Management Engine version is exactly 4.1, or falls between 5.7.0.0 and 5.7.0.6, or is earlier than 5.6.2.2.
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 data5.6.2.25.7.0.7
Upgrade CloudForms to version 5.6.2.2 or 5.7.0.7 or later to obtain the patched version that implements proper permission controls on VM ID parameters.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-7071 — 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-2016-7071 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