CVE-2016-8786
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 S12700 V200R005C00, V200R006C00, V200R007C00, V200R008C00, S5700 V200R006C00, V200R007C00, V200R008C00, S6700 V200R008C00, S7700 V200R001C00, V200R002C00, V200R003C00, V200R005C00, V200R006C00, V200R007C00, V200R008C00, S9700 V200R001C00, V200R002C00, V200R003C00, V200R005C00, V200R006C00, V200R007C00, V200R008C00 have a denial of service (DoS) vulnerability. Due to the lack of input validation, a remote attacker may craft a malformed Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) packet and send it to the device, causing a few buffer overflows and occasional device restart.
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 denial of service vulnerability in Huawei S12700, S5700, S6700, S7700, and S9700 switch products across multiple firmware versions. Due to insufficient input validation when processing Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) packets, a remote attacker can send a malformed RSVP packet that triggers buffer overflows, causing the affected device to restart unexpectedly.
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= v200r005c00= v200r006c00= v200r007c00= v200r008c00= v200r006c00= v200r007c00= v200r008c00= v200r008c00= v200r001c00= v200r002c00= v200r003c00= v200r005c00= v200r006c00= v200r007c00= v200r008c00= v200r001c00= v200r002c00= v200r003c00= v200r005c00= v200r006c00= v200r007c00= v200r008c00CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 the Huawei switch modelLog into the device CLI and run 'display device' or 'display version' to confirm the model number is one of: S12700, S5700, S6700, S7700, or S9700Affected if The model is not one of these five listed models
-
Check the installed firmware versionRun 'display version' in the device CLI and locate the Software Version field. Compare it against the affected version list for your modelAffected if The firmware version matches exactly one of: v200r001c00, v200r002c00, v200r003c00, v200r005c00, v200r006c00, v200r007c00, or v200r008c00 (specific to your model)
-
Verify if RSVP protocol is enabledRun 'display current-configuration | include rsvp' or 'display rsvp interface' to check if RSVP is configured on any interfaceAffected if RSVP is enabled and the device is processing RSVP traffic
The device is affected if it is an S12700, S5700, S6700, S7700, or S9700 running an affected firmware version AND has RSVP protocol enabled to process incoming RSVP packets.
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 vendor-supplied firmware patches for the affected versions. As an interim control, consider filtering or rate-limiting RSVP traffic at network boundaries until patches can be deployed.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $4,128.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-8786 — 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-2016-8786 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