The Fileserver web application in Apache ActiveMQ 5.x before 5.14.0 allows remote attackers to upload and execute arbitrary files via an HTTP PUT followed by an HTTP MOVE request.
CVE-2016-3088
“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.
Score elevated to 9.8 because this CVE is listed on the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog (added 2022-02-10), indicating real-world exploitation has been confirmed by US federal agencies. NVD baseline CVSS 9.8 retained for reference. Confidence: HIGH.
Also known asEUVD-2022-5255 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-rxqh-fc23-gxp2 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD
- Actively exploited in the wild (CISA-KEV) — the reason this is sooner than the SSVC decision on this page at low mission impact
A fix is available — apply it.
- CVSS v3
- 9.8
- EG Score
- 9.8CRITICALhigh confidence
- EG Risk
- 99EG Risk 99/100
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.Exploitation100% × 40%Fixed at 100% for a CISA KEV listing: EchelonGraph's rule.Automatability100% × 15%CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Attend at low mission impact; Act at medium or high.Exploitation active (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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 sooner than your standard update timelines at low mission impact and as soon as possible at medium or high. - EPSS PROB
- 99%
- EPSS %ILE
- 99th
- KEV
- ⚠ Exploited
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
- 99% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-01). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- CISA KEV and EG-KEV Tier 1 (exploited in the wild)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Act at medium mission impactAttend at low mission impact; Act at medium or high.CISA BOD 26-04: 3 days & forensic triage if the affected system is publicly exposed; 3 days & forensic triage 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)Attend at low mission impact; Act at medium or high.
A fix is available. Apply it sooner than your standard update timelines at low mission impact and as soon as possible at medium or high.
Exploitation active (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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)3 days & forensic triage if the affected system is publicly exposed; 3 days & forensic triage if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV yes (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). 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
CISA required action“Apply updates per vendor instructions.”
Quoted verbatim from CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. CISA directs it at US federal civilian executive branch agencies under Binding Operational Directive (BOD) 26-04, which replaced BOD 22-01 on 10 June 2026; it is not EchelonGraph's advice. CISA's notes: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-3088
Published
June 1, 2016
Last Modified
June 17, 2026
Advisory Details (9)
Auto-updated Oct 28, 2026ActiveMQ < 5.14.0 - Web Shell Upload (Metasploit) - Java remote Exploit
https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/42283/Pony Mail
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r6d03e45b81eab03580cf7f8bb51cb3e9a1b10a2cc0c6a2d3cc92ed0c%40%3Cannounce.apache.org%3EPony Mail
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f956ea38e4da2e2c1e7131e6f91e41754852f5a4861d1a14ca5ca78a%40%3Cusers.activemq.apache.org%3EPony Mail
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a859563f05fbe7c31916b3178c2697165bd9bbf5a65d1cf62aef27d2%40%3Ccommits.activemq.apache.org%3EZDI-16-357 - TrendAI™ Zero Day Initiative™ (ZDI)
http://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-16-357ZDI-16-356 - TrendAI™ Zero Day Initiative™ (ZDI)
http://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-16-356Vendor Advisories for CVE-2016-3088(1)
These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.
Patch Availability(3)
| Vendor / Ecosystem | Fix (by version range) / Patch | Released | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| redhat | patch | 2016-10-06 | redhat |
| redhat | patch | 2015-06-23 | redhat |
| maven | org.apache.activemq:activemq-client @ 5.14.0 (fixes >= 5.0.0, < 5.14.0) | — | 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
(4 across 4 ecosystems)
Debian:11(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| activemq | — |
| — |
Debian:12(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| activemq | — |
| — |
Debian:13(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| activemq | — |
| — |
Maven(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| org.apache.activemq:activemq-client | 5.10.0 ... 5.9.1 (21 versions) |
| — |
Weakness Classification(2)
MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.
Additional Vendor Advisories
(1)
Vendors that published advisories for this CVE beyond the curated set above. Broader coverage but minimal per-row detail — click through for the original advisory.
Data Freshness Timeline
(refreshed 17× in last 7d / 106× 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 it from the CNA feed. 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). Most recent first.
Showing the most recent 100 of 1,008 refreshes on record for this CVE.
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. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 908 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.
- 2026-11-02 10:55 UTCOSV refresh
- 2026-11-01 22:26 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-11-01 22:26 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-11-01 22:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rxqh-fc23-gxp2 · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-11-01 08:47 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rxqh-fc23-gxp2 · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-11-01 08:47 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-31 20:23 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-31 20:23 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-30 18:20 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-30 18:20 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-29 16:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 99% · 99th percentile
- 2026-10-29 16:16 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-29 16:16 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-28 14:13 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-28 14:13 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-27 12:08 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-27 12:08 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-26 10:04 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-25 19:47 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-25 16:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 99% · 99th percentile
- 2026-10-25 08:00 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-25 08:00 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-24 16:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 99% · 99th percentile
- 2026-10-24 05:56 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-24 05:56 UTCVendor advisory
Show 75 moreShow fewer
- 2026-10-23 03:52 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-23 03:52 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-22 01:48 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-22 01:48 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-20 23:43 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-19 21:36 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-19 21:36 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-18 19:31 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-18 19:31 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-18 10:51 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-17 17:26 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-17 17:26 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-16 15:20 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-16 15:20 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-15 13:15 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-15 13:15 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-14 16:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 99% · 99th percentile
- 2026-10-14 11:12 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-14 11:12 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-13 09:07 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-12 20:44 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-12 07:02 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-12 03:15 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-11 23:27 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-11 19:42 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 19:42 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-11 15:58 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 15:58 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-11 12:15 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 12:15 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-11 08:27 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-11 04:40 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-11 00:56 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-10 21:09 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-10 17:23 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-10 13:38 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-10 09:54 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-10 06:10 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-10 02:24 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-09 22:39 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-09 18:55 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-09 15:10 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-09 11:25 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-09 07:40 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-09 03:56 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-09 00:10 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-08 20:26 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-08 16:42 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-08 12:58 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-08 09:11 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-08 05:26 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-08 01:42 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-07 21:57 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-07 18:14 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-07 14:29 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-07 10:44 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-07 07:00 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-07 03:16 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-06 23:31 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-06 19:47 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-06 16:04 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-06 12:19 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-06 08:35 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-06 04:49 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-06 01:05 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-05 21:20 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-05 17:35 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-05 13:51 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-05 10:08 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-05 06:23 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-05 02:38 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-04 22:54 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-04 19:10 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-04 15:26 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-04 11:41 UTCVendor advisory
Publicly available exploits
(9 references)Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (1 Metasploit module, 2 Exploit-DB entries, 5 GitHub PoCs), 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-42283✓ verifiedPublished Jun 29, 2017
ActiveMQ < 5.14.0 - Web Shell Upload (Metasploit)
Open source ↗ - Metasploitexploit/multi/http/apache_activemq_upload_jsp✓ verifiedPublished Jun 28, 2017
ActiveMQ web shell upload
Open source ↗ - Exploit-DBEDB-40857✓ verifiedPublished Aug 17, 2015
Apache ActiveMQ 5.11.1/5.13.2 - Directory Traversal / Command Execution
Open source ↗ - GitHub PoCCatherines77/ActiveMQ-EXPtoolsPublished Apr 20, 2026
Apache ActiveMQ漏洞综合利用工具(CVE-2015-5254,CVE-2016-3088,CVE-2022-41678,CVE-2023-46604,CVE-2024-32114,CVE-2026-34197,CVE-2026-40466)
Open source ↗ - GitHub PoCYutuSec/ActiveMQ_CrackPublished Apr 2, 2022
ActiveMQ系列漏洞探测利用工具,包括ActiveMQ 默认口令漏洞及ActiveMQ任意文件写入漏洞(CVE-2016-3088),支持批量探测利用。
Open source ↗ - Nucleihttp/cves/2016/CVE-2016-3088.yamlPublished Nov 6, 2021
Apache ActiveMQ Fileserver - Arbitrary File Write
Open source ↗ - GitHub PoCcl4ym0re/CVE-2016-3088Published Jul 3, 2021
Apache ActiveMQ PUT RCE Scan
Open source ↗ - GitHub PoCcyberaguiar/CVE-2016-3088Published Mar 11, 2021
Apache ActiveMQ Remote Code Execution Exploit
Open source ↗ - GitHub PoCMa1Dong/ActiveMQ_putshell-CVE-2016-3088Published Jul 31, 2020
ActiveMQ_putshell直接获取webshell
Open source ↗
Related CVEs(same product + same vendor + same CWE)
Same product
10 shownMaven:org.apache.activemq:activemq-client
- CVE-2023-46604NVD 9.8EG 10.0 KEVEPSS p100CRITICAL
- CVE-2014-3600EG 9.8EPSS p95CRITICAL
- CVE-2015-5254EG 9.8EPSS p99CRITICAL
- CVE-2026-39304EG 7.5HIGH
- CVE-2025-27533EG 7.5EPSS p95HIGH
- CVE-2019-0222EG 7.5EPSS p96HIGH
- CVE-2014-3576EG 7.5EPSS p96HIGH
- CVE-2018-11775EG 7.4EPSS p94HIGH
- CVE-2016-6810EG 6.1EPSS p93MEDIUM
- CVE-2016-0782EG 5.4EPSS p93MEDIUM
Same vendor
10 shownredhat:RHSA-2016:2036 · redhat:RHSA-2015:1176
- CVE-2016-4437EG 9.8 KEVEPSS p100CRITICAL
- CVE-2015-5254EG 9.8EPSS p99CRITICAL
- CVE-2015-0226EG 7.5EPSS p93HIGH
- CVE-2014-5075EG 6.8MEDIUM
- CVE-2014-3577EG 5.8EPSS p95MEDIUM
- CVE-2014-0363EG 5.8MEDIUM
- CVE-2015-3192EG 5.5MEDIUM
- CVE-2015-7940EG 5.0EPSS p92MEDIUM
- CVE-2015-0227EG 5.0EPSS p95MEDIUM
- CVE-2014-0364EG 5.0EPSS p94MEDIUM
Same CWE
10 shownCWE-20
Frequently asked(6)
What is CVE-2016-3088?
When was CVE-2016-3088 made public?
Is CVE-2016-3088 actively exploited?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2016-3088?
Which products are affected by CVE-2016-3088?
How do I remediate CVE-2016-3088?
Dependency Blast Radius
See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2016-3088
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2016-3088?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.