dbcve.org
Ironport AsyncosOperating system · Cisco

CVE-2014-2119

HIGH · 8.5 CVSS v2.0 Published 2014-03-21
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 7.9.1-039 or later.
See remediation →
91/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
The End User Safelist/Blocklist (aka SLBL) service in Cisco AsyncOS Software for Email Security Appliance (ESA) before 7.6.3-023 and 8.x before 8.0.1-023 and Cisco Content Security Management Appliance (SMA) before 7.9.1-110 and 8.x before 8.1.1-013 allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary code with root privileges via an FTP session that uploads a modified SLBL database file, aka Bug IDs CSCug79377 and CSCug80118.

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 confidence

Authenticated remote users with FTP access to Cisco Email Security Appliance (ESA) or Content Security Management Appliance (SMA) can upload a modified Safelist/Blocklist (SLBL) database file via FTP that, when processed by the SLBL service, executes arbitrary code with root privileges. This is a privilege escalation from authenticated user to root.

MitigationUpgrade Cisco AsyncOS Software for ESA to version 7.6.3-023/8.0.1-023 or later, and for SMA to version 7.9.1-110/8.1.1-013 or later. If FTP access is not required, disable it as a compensating control.

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 data
Ironport AsyncosOperating system
Affected:<= 7.9.1-039= 8.0= 8.0.1= 8.1<= 7.6.2-201
Content Security Management ApplianceHardware / appliance
Affected:all versions
Email Security Appliance FirmwareOperating system
Affected:all versions

CVSS 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
M
Authentication
Single
Confidentiality
Complete
Integrity
Complete
Availability
Complete

AV:N/AC:M/Au:S/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify the appliance type and AsyncOS version
    Log into the CLI and run the 'version' command, or check via the web interface under System Administration > AsyncOS Upgrade. Note whether it is an ESA (Email Security Appliance) or SMA (Content Security Management Appliance).
    Affected if The version falls within: Cisco Ironport Asyncos <= 7.9.1-039, = 8.0, = 8.0.1, = 8.1, <= 7.6.2-201, OR if the appliance is an SMA (all versions are affected).
  2. Confirm FTP access is enabled
    Log into the CLI and run 'ftpconfig' to view FTP settings, or check via the web interface under Network > FTP Access. Verify if FTP service is turned on and accessible.
    Affected if FTP is enabled and accessible to authenticated users. The vulnerability requires FTP access to upload the malicious SLBL file.
  3. Verify the SLBL (Safelist/Blocklist) feature is configured
    Log into the CLI and run 'slblconfig' to check SLBL settings, or check via the web interface under Mail Policies > Safelist/Blocklist. Confirm whether the SLBL service is enabled and has a database configured.
    Affected if SLBL is enabled and a Safelist/Blocklist database exists on the appliance. The vulnerability triggers when the SLBL service processes the uploaded modified database file.

You are affected if your appliance is an SMA (any version) or an ESA running a vulnerable AsyncOS version AND both FTP access and the SLBL feature are enabled.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 7.9.1-039
Interim mitigation

Upgrade Cisco AsyncOS Software for ESA to version 7.6.3-023/8.0.1-023 or later, and for SMA to version 7.9.1-110/8.1.1-013 or later. If FTP access is not required, disable it as a compensating control.

Fix this in Ironport Asyncos Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-2119 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2014-2119 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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