CVE-2017-16050
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`sqlite.js` was a malicious module published with the intent to hijack environment variables. It has been unpublished by npm.
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 confidenceThe sqlite.js package was a deliberately malicious npm module published to the npm registry with the intent to hijack and exfiltrate environment variables. This represents a supply chain compromise rather than a traditional software vulnerability.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Check if sqlite.js exists in node_modulesRun `ls node_modules/sqlite.js` or `npm ls sqlite.js` to see if the package is installedAffected if The package directory exists in node_modules or appears in the dependency tree
-
Inspect package.json dependenciesSearch your package.json, package-lock.json, or yarn.lock files for 'sqlite.js' as a dependencyAffected if sqlite.js is listed as a direct or transitive dependency
-
Verify package source and publisherIf found, run `npm view sqlite.js` to check the package metadata - this malicious package was published by 'vakab'Affected if The package is published by 'vakab' or has no legitimate maintainer
-
Audit npm dependency treeRun `npm audit` or use `npm ls --all` to get a full dependency tree and search for sqlite.js presenceAffected if sqlite.js appears anywhere in the complete dependency tree
If sqlite.js is present anywhere in your node_modules, dependency files, or npm/yarn lockfiles, your environment is affected by this malicious package and env vars may have been exfiltrated.
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 dataImmediately audit dependencies to confirm sqlite.js is not present in the dependency tree, remove any instances if found, rotate all environment variables and secrets that may have been exposed, and review application logs for signs of unauthorized access or data exfiltration.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,912.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-16050 — 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-2017-16050 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