CVE-2009-5143
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 · uneditedGE Healthcare Discovery 530C has a password of #bigguy1 for the (1) acqservice user and (2) wsservice user of the Xeleris System, which has unspecified impact and attack vectors. NOTE: it is not clear whether this password is default, hardcoded, or dependent on another system or product that requires a fixed value.
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 confidenceGE Healthcare Discovery 530C Xeleris System contains hardcoded passwords ('#bigguy1') embedded for two service accounts (acqservice and wsservice). This critical vulnerability allows unauthorized access to the system using these static credentials, potentially enabling attackers to access sensitive medical data or disrupt system operations.
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
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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 system model and versionIdentify if the target system is a GE Healthcare Discovery 530C Xeleris System. Check system inventory, device label, or administrative interface for model identification.Affected if The system is a GE Healthcare Discovery 530C Xeleris System running any firmware version.
-
Check acqservice account credentialsAttempt to authenticate to the system using the account 'acqservice' with the hardcoded password '#bigguy1', or review authentication logs for failed attempts using these credentials.Affected if The account 'acqservice' still uses the default hardcoded password '#bigguy1'.
-
Check wsservice account credentialsAttempt to authenticate to the system using the account 'wsservice' with the hardcoded password '#bigguy1', or review authentication logs for failed attempts using these credentials.Affected if The account 'wsservice' still uses the default hardcoded password '#bigguy1'.
-
Review service account configurationIf administrative access is available, inspect the user management or service account configuration panel to verify whether the passwords for acqservice and wsservice have been changed from the default '#bigguy1'.Affected if Either service account retains the factory default password '#bigguy1'.
A user is affected if their GE Healthcare Discovery 530C Xeleris System still has the default hardcoded password '#bigguy1' configured for either the acqservice or wsservice accounts.
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 dataImmediately change the hardcoded passwords for both acqservice and wsservice accounts to unique, strong passwords following vendor guidance; implement proper credential management and investigate whether this affects other GE Healthcare systems.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-5143 — 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-2009-5143 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