CVE-2017-16320
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 · uneditedMultiple exploitable buffer overflow vulnerabilities exist in the PubNub message handler for the "cc" channel of Insteon Hub running firmware version 1012. Specially crafted commands sent through the PubNub service can cause a stack-based buffer overflow overwriting arbitrary data. An attacker should send an authenticated HTTP request to trigger this vulnerability. In cmd s_sonos, at 0x9d01ddd4, the value for the `s_sonos_cmd` key is copied using `strcpy` to the buffer at `$sp+0x290`.This buffer is 32 bytes large, sending anything longer will cause a buffer overflow.
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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflow in Insteon Hub firmware 1012 where the PubNub message handler for the 'cc' channel copies the s_sonos_cmd parameter using unbounded strcpy into a 32-byte buffer at stack pointer offset 0x290, allowing overflow with payloads exceeding 32 bytes.
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= 1012CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 Insteon Hub deviceConfirm the target device is an Insteon Hub (model 2245-222) by checking device documentation, network inventory, or device management interfaceAffected if Device is not an Insteon Hub, then not affected by this CVE
-
Check firmware versionAccess the Insteon Hub administration interface or use the Insteon app to view the installed firmware version; compare against version 1012Affected if Firmware version is anything other than exactly 1012, then not affected by this CVE
-
Verify PubNub integration is enabledCheck if the Insteon Hub has PubNub cloud connectivity enabled in the device settings or network configurationAffected if PubNub is disabled or not configured, the attack surface may not be exposed
-
Confirm cc channel accessibilityDetermine if the PubNub 'cc' channel is accessible by checking device network configuration or API endpoints; this is the channel that handles the s_sonos_cmd parameterAffected if The cc channel is not accessible or not in use, the specific vulnerability path may not be reachable
The device is affected only if it is an Insteon Hub running firmware version 1012 with PubNub cc channel enabled and accessible, allowing external injection of the s_sonos_cmd parameter into the vulnerable strcpy call.
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 dataReplace strcpy with bounds-checked functions (strncpy/strlcpy) and implement input validation for the s_sonos_cmd parameter in the firmware; apply vendor firmware patch when available.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-16320 — 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-2017-16320 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