CVE-2017-16073
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 · uneditednoderequest 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 It has been unpublished by npm.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 · moderate confidencenoderequest was a malicious npm module designed to exfiltrate environment variables from systems where it was installed. The package was published to the npm registry with the intent to harvest sensitive data such as API keys, credentials, and other environment-specific configuration values.
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.
-
Search package.json for noderequestInspect your project's package.json file for 'noderequest' in the dependencies, devDependencies, or optionalDependencies sectionsAffected if noderequest appears in any dependencies section
-
Inspect node_modules directoryCheck if the noderequest directory exists in node_modules: ls node_modules/noderequest or dir node_modules\noderequest on WindowsAffected if The noderequest folder exists in node_modules
-
Review package lock filesSearch your package-lock.json or yarn.lock file for references to 'noderequest'Affected if noderequest is listed in the lock file
-
Check for nested dependenciesSearch for noderequest as a transitive dependency: grep -r 'noderequest' node_modules/*/package.json or use npm ls noderequestAffected if noderequest appears as a sub-dependency of another package
-
Audit npm install historyReview your project's dependency installation history or check version control commit logs for when noderequest was addedAffected if noderequest was ever present in the dependency tree
If noderequest is or was ever present in your dependency tree, your environment variables 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 verify if noderequest was ever installed in any project dependencies. If present, remove the package and rotate all credentials, API keys, tokens, and secrets that may have been exposed through environment variables on affected systems.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,456.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-16073 — 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-2017-16073 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