CVE-2016-9193
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 · uneditedA vulnerability in the malicious file detection and blocking features of Cisco Firepower Management Center and Cisco FireSIGHT System Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass malware detection mechanisms on an affected system. Affected Products: Cisco Firepower Management Center and FireSIGHT System Software are affected when they are configured to use a file policy that has the Block Malware action. More Information: CSCvb27494. Known Affected Releases: 6.0.1.1 6.1.0.
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 · moderate confidenceThis vulnerability allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to bypass malware detection mechanisms in Cisco Firepower Management Center and FireSIGHT System Software when configured with a file policy containing the Block Malware action. The attacker can send malicious files that evade the detection logic, potentially delivering malware to protected networks.
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= 6.0.0= 6.0.0.0= 6.0.0.1= 6.0.1= 6.0.1.1= 6.1.0= 6.0.0= 6.0.0.0= 6.0.0.1= 6.0.1= 6.0.1.1= 6.1.0CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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.
-
Identify the installed productLog into the Cisco Firepower Management Center or FireSIGHT System Console and navigate to System > About > Updates or Help > About to confirm the product name and exact version numberAffected if Product is Cisco Firepower Management Center or Cisco Firesight System Software
-
Check the installed versionLocate the version number in the About page or via CLI command 'show version' and compare it to the affected versions: 6.0.0, 6.0.0.0, 6.0.0.1, 6.0.1, 6.0.1.1, 6.1.0Affected if Installed version matches one of the listed affected versions
-
Verify file policy configurationNavigate to Policies > Access Control > File Policy (or Policies > Malware Protection > File Policy in older interfaces) and examine if any file policy exists with the 'Block Malware' action enabledAffected if A file policy with 'Block Malware' action is active
User is affected if running an affected version (6.0.0 through 6.1.0) of Cisco Firepower Management Center or Firesight System Software AND has a file policy configured with the Block Malware action.
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 Cisco security updates when available. In the interim, augment file inspection with additional security controls such as endpoint protection, network segmentation, and enhanced monitoring for anomalous file transfers.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-9193 — 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-2016-9193 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