CVE-2018-16499
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 · uneditedIn VOS compromised, an attacker at network endpoints can possibly view communications between an unsuspecting user and the service using man-in-the-middle attacks. Usage of unapproved SSH encryption protocols or cipher suites also violates the Data Protection TSR (Technical Security Requirements).
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 confidenceVOS uses weak or unapproved SSH encryption protocols and cipher suites that are susceptible to man-in-the-middle attacks, allowing an attacker at network endpoints to intercept and view communications between users and the service. This violates Data Protection TSR requirements for approved cryptographic protections.
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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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.
-
Access SSH daemon configurationLog into the VOS CLI and examine the SSH daemon configuration file, typically located at /etc/ssh/sshd_config or accessed via 'show system services ssh'Affected if Configuration file cannot be accessed or does not exist
-
Check configured SSH cipher suitesLocate the 'Ciphers' directive in the SSH configuration and list all allowed cipher algorithmsAffected if Weak or legacy ciphers are present (e.g., 3des-cbc, aes128-cbc, aes192-cbc, aes256-cbc, blowfish-cbc, cast128-cbc)
-
Check configured key exchange algorithmsLocate the 'KexAlgorithms' or 'KeyExchanges' directive and list all allowed key exchange methodsAffected if Weak key exchange algorithms are present (e.g., diffie-hellman-group1-sha1, diffie-hellman-group14-sha1)
-
Check configured MAC algorithmsLocate the 'MACs' directive and list all allowed message authentication code algorithmsAffected if Weak MAC algorithms are present (e.g., hmac-md5, hmac-md5-96, hmac-sha1, hmac-sha1-96)
-
Verify against approved cryptographic standardsCompare all configured SSH ciphers, key exchange algorithms, and MACs against FIPS 140-2 validated or organizationally approved listsAffected if Any weak, deprecated, or non-approved cryptographic primitives are configured
The environment is affected if the VOS SSH daemon configuration contains any weak cipher suites, key exchange algorithms, or MAC algorithms that are not FIPS 140-2 validated or organizationally approved.
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 SSH daemon configuration on VOS systems to use only FIPS 140-2 validated or organizationally approved cipher suites and key exchange algorithms, then restart SSH services and verify connectivity.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,304.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-16499 — 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-2018-16499 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