CVE-2016-9299

CRITICALNVD 9.89.8
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.

Score 9.8 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2022-05-14. NVD baseline CVSS 9.8; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3
Weaponized

Also known asEUVD-2022-2070 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

9.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • 38 internet-facing services (distinct ip:port) on record running an affected version — derived from Shodan data (© Shodan); a patched service can stay counted while its port stays open
  • High exploitation likelihood — EPSS 97%
  • Public exploit code is available (Metasploit, Exploit-DB, marked verified by Exploit-DB)
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 97%CVSS: 9.8Exploit: Metasploit · Exploit-DB (verified)Exposed services: 38

A fix is available — apply it.

The remoting module in Jenkins before 2.32 and LTS before 2.19.3 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted serialized Java object, which triggers an LDAP query to a third-party server.

Internet exposure · derived from Shodan data

38 internet-facing services (distinct ip:port) on record running a version that maps to CVE-2016-9299, in our KEV-Exposure radar’s Shodan-derived sample.

across 16 hosting countries (United States, China, France, Canada, Germany)top: jenkins
See the KEV-Exposure radar →Derived from Shodan data. Shodan data is owned by Shodan, which holds its copyright (© Shodan). EchelonGraph claims no ownership of it or copyright in it. Aggregate, host-redacted.

How it counts: every 12 hours, when Shodan query credits allow, the radar runs one Shodan query per tracked product, reads up to 100 ip:port services per query, and keeps a service when its banner version matches a CISA-KEV or high-EPSS CVE; a service is dropped when neither a search nor a Shodan InternetDB port re-check has refreshed it for 21 days. A re-check that finds the port still listed by Shodan InternetDB refreshes the service without re-reading the banner, so a patched service can stay counted while its port stays open. A count is a banner-version inference over a sample, not an exploit test and not an internet-wide census, and the unit is a service, not a machine: a machine answering on two ports counts twice.

CVSS v3
9.8
EG Score
9.8CRITICALmedium confidence
EG Risk
83
EG Risk 83/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity98% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 9.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation97% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.
Exploitation public PoC (exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
97%
EPSS %ILE
99th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (9.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
9.8 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
97% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-12). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track* at medium mission impactTrack at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation public PoC (exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

January 12, 2017

Last Modified

June 17, 2026

Advisory Details (10)

Auto-updated Oct 6, 2026
Patch available.
Web page

Jenkins CLI - HTTP Java Deserialization (Metasploit) - Linux remote Exploit

https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/44642/
Web page

[SECURITY] Fedora 25 Update: jenkins-remoting-2.62.3-1.fc25 - package-announce - Fedora mailing-lists

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ZW2KUKYLNLVDB7STLHLYALCUFLEGCRM6/
Web page

CVE-2016-9299 - PSIRT.COM

http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/94281
Web page

oss-security - Re: CVE request: Jenkins remote code execution vulnerability

http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/11/14/9
Web page

oss-security - CVE request: Jenkins remote code execution vulnerability

http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/11/12/4

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2016-9299(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Patch Availability(2)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
mavenorg.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core @ 2.32 (fixes >= 2.20, <= 2.31)—ghsa
mavenorg.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core @ 2.19.3 (fixes <= 2.19.2)—ghsa

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
Maven(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core1.396 ... 2.9 (355 versions)
  • 2.20 up to 2.32: fixed in 2.32
  • every version up to 2.19.3: fixed in 2.19.3
—

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 8× in last 7d / 19× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed its CVE.org record (CNA or CISA ADP). An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). "EchelonGraph re-scored" is our own recompute of this CVE's score, not an update from a source, and is not counted in the refreshes above. Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 100 of 111 rows on record for this CVE, as 92 entries (8 repeats merged).

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 8 repeat rows among the latest 100 are merged into the row they repeat. The 11 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-12 22:49 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  2. 2026-11-12 22:49 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  3. 2026-11-12 16:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  4. 2026-11-11 21:24 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  5. 2026-11-11 21:24 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  6. 2026-11-10 20:02 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  7. 2026-11-10 20:02 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  8. 2026-11-09 18:40 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  9. 2026-11-09 18:40 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  10. 2026-11-08 17:19 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  11. 2026-11-08 17:19 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  12. 2026-11-07 15:57 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  13. 2026-11-07 15:57 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  14. 2026-11-06 14:35 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  15. 2026-11-06 14:35 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  16. 2026-11-05 13:13 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  17. 2026-11-05 13:13 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  18. 2026-11-04 11:49 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  19. 2026-11-04 11:49 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  20. 2026-11-03 10:27 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  21. 2026-11-03 10:27 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  22. 2026-11-02 12:55 UTCOSV refresh
  23. 2026-11-02 08:57 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  24. 2026-11-02 08:57 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  25. 2026-11-01 08:46 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2x9h-h3c4-wqqh · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
Show 67 more
  1. 2026-11-01 08:46 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  2. 2026-11-01 07:36 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  3. 2026-10-31 16:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  4. 2026-10-31 06:14 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  5. 2026-10-30 04:53 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  6. 2026-10-29 16:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  7. 2026-10-29 03:32 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  8. 2026-10-28 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  9. 2026-10-28 02:10 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  10. 2026-10-27 00:46 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  11. 2026-10-25 19:43 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  12. 2026-10-25 16:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  13. 2026-10-24 18:20 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  14. 2026-10-23 16:58 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  15. 2026-10-22 15:36 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  16. 2026-10-21 14:07 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  17. 2026-10-20 16:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  18. 2026-10-20 12:45 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  19. 2026-10-19 11:22 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  20. 2026-10-18 08:52 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  21. 2026-10-17 07:29 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  22. 2026-10-16 06:06 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  23. 2026-10-15 04:42 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  24. 2026-10-14 00:36 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  25. 2026-10-13 16:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  26. 2026-10-12 20:39 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  27. 2026-10-12 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  28. 2026-10-12 01:02 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  29. 2026-10-11 13:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  30. 2026-10-10 19:55 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  31. 2026-10-07 23:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  32. 2026-10-04 08:37 UTCOSV refresh
  33. 2026-09-30 09:17 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  34. 2026-09-19 15:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  35. 2026-09-14 22:44 UTCOSV refresh
  36. 2026-09-11 09:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  37. 2026-09-01 03:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 98% · 99th percentile
  38. 2026-08-28 21:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 88% · 99th percentile
  39. 2026-08-27 14:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 98% · 99th percentile
  40. 2026-08-26 22:16 UTCOSV refresh
  41. 2026-08-19 16:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  42. 2026-08-12 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  43. 2026-08-10 12:39 UTCOSV refresh
  44. 2026-08-09 13:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  45. 2026-08-01 04:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  46. 2026-07-26 14:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  47. 2026-07-25 13:11 UTCOSV refresh
  48. 2026-07-23 01:24 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  49. 2026-07-22 22:04 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  50. 2026-07-22 14:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  51. 2026-07-11 08:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  52. 2026-07-08 15:10 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  53. 2026-07-08 07:35 UTCOSV refresh
  54. 2026-06-30 23:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  55. 2026-06-28 04:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 97% · 99th percentile
  56. 2026-06-23 21:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 98% · 99th percentile
  57. 2026-06-19 19:35 UTCOSV refresh
  58. 2026-06-15 17:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 98% · 99th percentile
  59. 2026-06-14 23:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 89% · 99th percentile
  60. 2026-06-13 22:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 89% · 99th percentile
  61. 2026-06-05 22:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 89% · 99th percentile
  62. 2026-06-05 06:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 89% · 99th percentile
  63. 2026-06-04 13:10 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 89% · 99th percentile
  64. 2026-06-01 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 89% · 99th percentile
  65. 2026-05-31 00:13 UTCOSV refresh
  66. 2026-05-28 13:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 89% · 99th percentile
  67. 2026-05-27 13:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 89% · 99th percentile

Publicly available exploits

(3 references)

Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (1 Metasploit module, 1 Exploit-DB entry), as is 1 Nuclei detection template. A detection template checks whether a system is affected; it is not necessarily exploit code. Defenders should treat patch urgency accordingly.

  • Exploit-DBEDB-44642✓ verified
    Published May 17, 2018

    Jenkins CLI - HTTP Java Deserialization (Metasploit)

    Open source ↗
  • Metasploitexploit/linux/misc/jenkins_ldap_deserialize✓ verified
    Published May 16, 2018

    Jenkins CLI HTTP Java Deserialization Vulnerability

    Open source ↗
  • Nucleihttp/cves/2016/CVE-2016-9299.yaml
    Published Oct 28, 2024

    Jenkins CLI - HTTP Java Deserialization

    Open source ↗

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2016-9299?
CVE-2016-9299 is a critical-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on January 12, 2017. The remoting module in Jenkins before 2.32 and LTS before 2.19.3 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted serialized Java object, which triggers an LDAP query to a third-party server.
When was CVE-2016-9299 made public?
CVE-2016-9299 was made public on November 11, 2016: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, MITRE Corporation, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on January 12, 2017. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of June 17, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2016-9299 actively exploited?
CVE-2016-9299 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. EchelonGraph's EG-KEV model places it in Tier 2 (Weaponized), which is not evidence of exploitation: a Metasploit module exists for it, and Exploit-DB marks a public exploit for it as verified. EchelonGraph does not test whether exploit code works. FIRST EPSS estimates a 97% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (99th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2016-9299?
CVE-2016-9299 has a CVSS v3 base score of 9.8 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2016-9299?
A fix for CVE-2016-9299 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2016-9299 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2016-9299

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2016-9299?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.