CVE-2017-6016
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 Improper Access Control issue was discovered in LCDS - Leao Consultoria e Desenvolvimento de Sistemas LTDA ME LAquis SCADA. The following versions are affected: Versions 4.1 and prior versions released before January 20, 2017. An Improper Access Control vulnerability has been identified, which may allow an authenticated user to modify application files to escalate privileges.
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 confidenceImproper Access Control vulnerability in LAquis SCADA (versions 4.1 and prior) allows authenticated users to modify application files, potentially enabling privilege escalation through unauthorized file system access.
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<= 4.1CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/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.
-
Confirm LAquis SCADA installationSearch for LAquis SCADA in installed programs (Windows: Check Add/Remove Programs, Linux: check package manager or common install directories)Affected if LAquis SCADA is found installed on the system
-
Identify installed versionLocate the installed Laquis Scada version number in the application properties, about dialog, or installation directoryAffected if Version is 4.1 or any version prior to 4.1
-
Verify authentication is enabledCheck if user authentication is required to access the LAquis SCADA application (review application settings, user management configuration, or login requirements)Affected if Authentication is disabled or set to allow any authenticated user without proper access controls
-
Check application file write permissionsExamine file system permissions on the LAquis SCADA installation directory and configuration files to determine if authenticated users have write accessAffected if Authenticated users can modify application files, configuration files, or executable directories
The environment is affected if LAquis SCADA version 4.1 or prior is installed AND authentication allows user access to modify application files.
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 dataUpdate to patched version released after January 20, 2017. If patching is not feasible, implement compensating controls including strict authentication mechanisms, file system access restrictions, and network isolation to limit exposure.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-6016 — 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-2017-6016 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