CVE-2016-8566
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in Siemens SICAM PAS before 8.00. Because of Storing Passwords in a Recoverable Format, an authenticated local attacker with certain privileges could possibly reconstruct the passwords of users for accessing the database.
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 confidenceSiemens SICAM PAS versions before 8.00 store database user passwords in a recoverable (reversible) format rather than using proper salted cryptographic hashing. An authenticated local attacker with sufficient privileges can exploit this to reconstruct plaintext passwords for database access.
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< 8.00CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/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.
-
Identify installed SICAM PAS versionAccess the SICAM PAS system information or About section, typically found in the main application menu or control panel. Check the version number displayed.Affected if Version number is below 8.00 (for example, 7.x or earlier releases)
-
Verify database authentication is in useCheck if the SICAM PAS installation uses its built-in database user authentication (versus external directory services like LDAP). This is typically configured in the Security or User Management settings within the SICAM PAS administration console.Affected if System is using local SICAM PAS database users for authentication rather than external authentication mechanisms
-
Locate database user configurationIn the SICAM PAS administration interface, navigate to the User/Role Management section and examine the database user accounts configured for application access. Look for user entries with database-level privileges.Affected if Local database user accounts exist in the system configuration
-
Confirm password storage format (if accessible)If you have administrative access to the underlying database, examine the password field storage format for SICAM PAS user accounts. Look for patterns indicating reversible encoding versus cryptographic hashes (salted hashes would appear as fixed-length random strings).Affected if Password fields contain encoded/encrypted strings that can be reversed to plaintext rather than salted hash values
The environment is affected if the installed SICAM PAS version is before 8.00 and the system uses local database user authentication with passwords stored in recoverable format.
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 data8.00
Upgrade to Siemens SICAM PAS version 8.00 or later, which implements proper secure password hashing. If immediate upgrade is not feasible, restrict local attacker access and monitor for unauthorized credential access attempts.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-8566 — 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-2016-8566 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