CVE-2014-9186
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 · uneditedA file inclusion vulnerability exists in the confd.exe module in Honeywell Experion PKS R40x before R400.6, R41x before R410.6, and R43x before R430.2, which could lead to accepting an arbitrary file into the function, and potential information disclosure or remote code execution. Honeywell strongly encourages and recommends all customers running unsupported versions of EKPS prior to R400 to upgrade to a supported version.
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 confidenceA file inclusion vulnerability exists in the confd.exe module of Honeywell Experion PKS. The flaw allows an attacker to include arbitrary files due to insufficient input validation, potentially leading to information disclosure (reading sensitive system files) or remote code execution.
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>= r400, < r400.6>= r410, < r410.6>= r430, < r430.2CVSS 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
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Verify Honeywell Experion PKS installationCheck system for presence of Honeywell Experion PKS installation. Look for installation directory under C:\Honeywell\ or check Windows Programs and Features for Experion entries.Affected if Experion PKS is not installed on the system
-
Identify installed Experion versionLocate version information in the Experion installation directory (check version.txt, about, or release notes), or query the Windows registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Honeywell\Experion for the installed version.Affected if Version is r400.x < 400.6, r410.x < 410.6, or r430.x < 430.2
-
Locate confd.exe moduleSearch for confd.exe file within the Experion installation directory, typically found in bin or system subdirectories.Affected if confd.exe is present in the installation path
-
Check confd.exe network exposureDetermine if confd.exe is network accessible by checking for open ports associated with Experion (common ports include 80, 443, 18881) or by reviewing IIS/web server configuration for confd.exe mappings.Affected if confd.exe is exposed via HTTP/HTTPS network services
System is affected if Honeywell Experion PKS is installed with confd.exe present and the installed version is r400.x before r400.6, r410.x before r410.6, or r430.x before r430.2
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade Honeywell Experion PKS to version R400.6 or later for R40x, R410.6 or later for R41x, and R430.2 or later for R43x. Honeywell recommends migrating from unsupported versions.
R400.6 (for r400.x), R410.6 (for r410.x), or R430.2 (for r430.x) - customers should upgrade to the minimum fixed version in their current release line
- 1. Identify the currently installed Experion PKS version by checking the system configuration or using the Honeywell system management tools.
- 2. Determine which upgrade path applies based on current version: if running r400.x, upgrade to R400.6 or later; if running r410.x, upgrade to R410.6 or later; if running r430.x, upgrade to R430.2 or later.
- 3. Contact Honeywell Technical Support to obtain the appropriate upgrade package and scheduling assistance.
- 4. Before upgrading, review Honeywell's upgrade documentation and perform a backup of the system configuration.
- 5. Schedule the upgrade during a planned maintenance window as the process may require system downtime.
- 6. Apply the upgrade following Honeywell's official upgrade procedures for the Experion PKS platform.
- 7. After upgrade, verify that confd.exe is updated and the file inclusion vulnerability is remediated.
- 8. Conduct post-upgrade testing to ensure normal system operation and confirm the vulnerability is no longer exploitable.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $12,352.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-9186 — 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-2014-9186 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