CVE-2017-16204
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 · uneditedThe jquey module exfiltrates sensitive data such as a user's private SSH key and bash history to a third party server during installation.
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 'jquey' npm package (a typosquat of jquery) contains malicious code that during installation exfiltrates sensitive user files including private SSH keys (~/.ssh/id_rsa, id_dsa, id_ecdsa, id_ed25519) and bash history (~/.bash_history) to an unknown remote third-party server.
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= 1.0.1CVSS 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
- 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 jquey package is installedRun 'npm list jquey' or 'yarn list jquey' to see if the package is present in node_modulesAffected if The jquey package appears in the package list at version 1.0.1
-
Inspect package.json dependenciesSearch package.json files in your project for 'jquey' in the dependencies, devDependencies, or peerDependencies sectionsAffected if jquey is listed as a dependency at version 1.0.1
-
Verify package installation locationCheck for the presence of node_modules/jquey directory and examine its package.json fileAffected if A node_modules/jquey directory exists with package.json showing version 1.0.1
-
Audit installed npm packages for typosquat variantsList all installed packages using 'npm list --depth=0' and look for jquey or similar misspellings of jqueryAffected if The jquey package (any version) is found in the local node_modules
You are affected if the jquey package at version 1.0.1 is present in your node_modules or listed as a dependency, as this malicious typosquat exfiltrates SSH keys and bash history during its installation.
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 remove the jquey package if present in any environment, rotate all SSH keys that may have been present on affected systems, and audit for unauthorized network connections to unknown servers.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,168.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-16204 — 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-2017-16204 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