CVE-2014-2940
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 · uneditedCobham Sailor 900 and 6000 satellite terminals with firmware 1.08 MFHF and 2.11 VHF have hardcoded credentials for the administrator account, which allows attackers to obtain administrative control by leveraging physical access or terminal access.
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 confidenceCobham Sailor 900 and 6000 satellite terminals running firmware versions 1.08 MFHF and 2.11 VHF contain hardcoded credentials for the built-in administrator account. An attacker with physical access to the terminal or terminal access (e.g., via connected network) can use these hardcoded credentials to obtain full administrative control of the device.
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= 1.08_mfhf= 2.11_vhf= 1.08_mfhf= 2.11_vhfCVSS 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.
-
Identify the device modelAccess the terminal's web interface, CLI, or system information page and confirm the device is a Cobham Sailor 900 or Cobham Sailor 6000 Series satellite terminalAffected if The device is a Cobham Sailor 900 or 6000 series terminal
-
Check the installed firmware versionLog into the terminal administrative interface and navigate to the firmware/version information section, or use the terminal's CLI command to display system version detailsAffected if The firmware version displayed is exactly 1.08_mfhf or 2.11_vhf
-
Verify default administrator credentials statusAttempt to access the terminal's administrative interface using the built-in administrator account, or inspect the user accounts configuration to determine if the default administrative password remains unchanged from factory defaultsAffected if The default administrator password has not been changed from the hardcoded factory value
The terminal is affected if it is a Cobham Sailor 900 or 6000 series device running firmware version 1.08_mfhf or 2.11_vhf, and the default administrator password has not been changed.
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 administrator password on all affected terminals to a strong, unique credential. If available, apply vendor firmware updates that may address this hardcoded credential issue. Restrict physical access to terminals and disable unnecessary remote administrative interfaces.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $4,640.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-2940 — 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-2014-2940 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