CVE-2016-9371
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 Moxa NPort 5110 versions prior to 2.6, NPort 5130/5150 Series versions prior to 3.6, NPort 5200 Series versions prior to 2.8, NPort 5400 Series versions prior to 3.11, NPort 5600 Series versions prior to 3.7, NPort 5100A Series & NPort P5150A versions prior to 1.3, NPort 5200A Series versions prior to 1.3, NPort 5150AI-M12 Series versions prior to 1.2, NPort 5250AI-M12 Series versions prior to 1.2, NPort 5450AI-M12 Series versions prior to 1.2, NPort 5600-8-DT Series versions prior to 2.4, NPort 5600-8-DTL Series versions prior to 2.4, NPort 6x50 Series versions prior to 1.13.11, NPort IA5450A versions prior to v1.4. User-controlled input is not neutralized before being output to web page (CROSS-SITE SCRIPTING).
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 confidenceCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Moxa NPort device web interfaces where user-controlled input is not properly sanitized before being rendered in web pages. This affects multiple NPort series (5110, 5130/5150, 5200, 5400, 5600, and variants) prior to their respective version thresholds, allowing attackers to inject malicious scripts via the web interface.
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<= 2.5<= 3.5<= 2.7<= 3.10<= 3.6<= 1.2<= 1.2<= 1.2<= 1.1CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 NPort device modelAccess the device web interface and locate the model number on the status/dashboard page, or check the physical device labelAffected if Device is one of the following series: 5100, 5130/5150, 5200, 5400, 5600, 5100a, P5150a, 5200a, or 5x50a1 M12
-
Check the installed firmware versionLog into the device web interface and navigate to System Settings or Device Management to view the firmware version. Alternatively, use the administrative console or SNMP to query the firmware version.Affected if Firmware version falls within any of these affected ranges: 5100 series <=2.5 or <=3.5, 5200 series <=2.7, 5400 series <=3.10, 5600 series <=3.6, 5100a <=1.2, P5150a <=1.2, 5200a <=1.2, 5x50a1 M12 <=1.1
-
Confirm the web interface is enabledVerify that the HTTP/HTTPS web server is enabled in the device network settings or administrative interface.Affected if The web interface is enabled (this is the default state for these devices)
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 updates to bring affected NPort devices to patched versions (2.6 for 5110, 3.6 for 5130/5150, 2.8 for 5200, 3.11 for 5400, 3.7 for 5600, 1.3 for 5100A/5200A, 1.2 for M12 series, 2.4 for DT/DTL series, 1.13.11 for 6x50, v1.4 for IA5450A).
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $3,152.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-9371 — 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-2016-9371 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