CVE-2010-5306
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 Optima CT680, CT540, CT640, and CT520 has a default password of #bigguy for the root user, which has unspecified impact and attack vectors.
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 · high confidenceGE Healthcare Optima CT680, CT540, CT640, and CT520 CT scanner systems contain a hardcoded default password '#bigguy' for the root user account. This default credential allows unauthenticated attackers to gain full administrative (root) access to the medical imaging device, potentially exposing patient data and compromising device functionality.
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 versionsall versionsall 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 device model is affectedIdentify the exact model number of the GE Healthcare CT scanner on the network or physical device label. Verify it is one of: Optima CT520, CT540, or CT680.Affected if Device model is Optima CT520, CT540, or CT680 (any firmware version)
-
Verify default password has been changedAttempt to access the device using the default root credentials (username: root, password: #bigguy) via SSH or console. If authentication succeeds, the default password is still active.Affected if Authentication with root/#bigguy succeeds and grants root access
-
Check network accessibility of administrative servicesReview network firewall rules and access lists to determine if the CT scanner administrative interfaces (SSH, telnet, or remote management ports) are reachable from untrusted network segments.Affected if Device administrative interfaces are exposed to untrusted or external networks
If the device is an Optima CT520, CT540, or CT680 and the default password #bigguy still works or administrative services are network-accessible, the environment is affected by this CVE.
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 default root password from '#bigguy' to a strong, unique credential following GE Healthcare vendor guidelines, and isolate these medical devices on a restricted network segment with firewall controls to prevent unauthorized access.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-5306 — 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-2010-5306 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