CVE-2016-8779
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 · uneditedHuawei FusionAccess with software V100R005C10 and V100R005C20 could allow remote attackers with specific permission to inject a Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) operation command into a specific input variable to obtain sensitive information from 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 confidenceHuawei FusionAccess V100R005C10 and V100R005C20 contains an LDAP injection vulnerability where remote authenticated attackers can inject LDAP operation commands into a specific input variable to extract sensitive information from the database.
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= v100r005c10= v100r005c20CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Confirm FusionAccess versionAccess the FusionAccess admin console or check system information files to identify the installed version. Look for V100R005C10 or V100R005C20 specifically.Affected if The installed version is exactly V100R005C10 or V100R005C20.
-
Verify LDAP authentication is enabledCheck the FusionAccess configuration for LDAP user authentication settings. Look for LDAP integration in the system settings or user management module.Affected if LDAP-based user authentication or directory services are configured and active.
-
Determine if remote LDAP access is permittedReview network access controls and LDAP service bind settings to see if remote authenticated users can submit LDAP queries.Affected if Remote users can authenticate and send LDAP queries to the system.
-
Identify input handling for LDAP operationsExamine the web application or API endpoints that accept user input for LDAP operations. Look for parameters passed to LDAP query functions without apparent sanitization.Affected if User-supplied input is used directly in LDAP query construction without parameterized queries or input validation.
The environment is affected only if FusionAccess version is exactly V100R005C10 or V100R005C20, LDAP authentication is enabled, and user input can be passed directly into LDAP operations without sanitization.
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 dataApply the vendor patch or implement proper input validation and parameterized LDAP queries to sanitize user-supplied input before constructing LDAP operations.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-8779 — 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-2016-8779 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