Maximo Asset ManagementApplication · Ibm

CVE-2016-8924

MEDIUM · 5.6 CVSS v3.0 Published 2017-04-26
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
65/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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
IBM Maximo Asset Management 7.1, 7.5 and 7.6 could allow a remote attacker to hijack a user's session, caused by the failure to invalidate an existing session identifier. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability to gain access to another user's session. IBM X-Force ID: 118537.

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 confidence

IBM Maximo Asset Management versions 7.1, 7.5, and 7.6 contain a session fixation/hijacking vulnerability where the application fails to properly invalidate existing session identifiers. This allows a remote attacker to obtain or predict a valid session ID and use it to impersonate a legitimate user, gaining unauthorized access to that user's session and account.

MitigationApply the IBM fix for this vulnerability (consult IBM support/patch database for APAR numbers), which should implement proper session invalidation including generating new session IDs upon authentication, invalidating sessions on logout, and enforcing session timeouts. Additionally, implement complementary controls such as IP binding for sessions and HTTPS-only session cookies.

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
Maximo Asset ManagementApplication
Affected:= 7.1= 7.5= 7.6

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
High
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

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 if IBM Maximo Asset Management is installed
    Locate Maximo installation directories or check system inventory for IBM Maximo Asset Management software
    Affected if IBM Maximo Asset Management is present on the system
  2. Determine the installed Maximo version
    Check the Maximo version information through the system about section, version file, or administrative console
    Affected if The installed version is exactly 7.1, 7.5, or 7.6
  3. Verify session ID regeneration on authentication
    Review session management configuration or logs to determine if a new session ID is generated when a user authenticates. This can be done by examining application server session configuration files or testing the authentication flow to observe if the session ID changes after login.
    Affected if The application does not generate a new session ID after successful authentication (session fixation vulnerability present)
  4. Confirm session invalidation on logout
    Test the logout functionality by authenticating, then logging out, and attempting to reuse the previous session ID to access protected resources
    Affected if The previous session ID remains valid after user logs out (session not properly invalidated)
  5. Check session timeout enforcement
    Review application or application server session timeout settings and verify that idle sessions are terminated after the configured period
    Affected if Sessions do not expire after a reasonable timeout period, allowing long-lived session IDs to be exploited

You are affected if IBM Maximo Asset Management version 7.1, 7.5, or 7.6 is installed AND the application does not implement proper session ID regeneration on authentication, session invalidation on logout, or session timeouts.

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

Apply the IBM fix for this vulnerability (consult IBM support/patch database for APAR numbers), which should implement proper session invalidation including generating new session IDs upon authentication, invalidating sessions on logout, and enforcing session timeouts. Additionally, implement complementary controls such as IP binding for sessions and HTTPS-only session cookies.

Fix this in Maximo Asset Management Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation6.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing10.0 h
  • Review / QA6.0 h
34.0 hours of engineering $5,940
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,504.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-8924 — 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-2016-8924 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