CVE-2014-9189
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 · uneditedMultiple stack-based buffer overflow vulnerabilities were found in Honeywell Experion PKS all versions prior to R400.6, all versions prior to R410.6, and all versions prior to R430.2 modules that could lead to possible remote code execution, dynamic memory corruption, or denial of service. 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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflow vulnerabilities in Honeywell Experion PKS (an industrial control system) across multiple modules allow remote code execution, memory corruption, or denial of service via malformed input. The vulnerability affects multiple unsupported version branches (pre-R400.6, pre-R410.6, pre-R430.2).
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.
-
Locate the installed Experion PKS versionAccess the Honeywell Experion system information panel, typically found in the System Configuration > About section of the Experion PKS console, or consult the system's installation documentation and version logsAffected if Unable to retrieve version information from the system
-
Identify the major version branchExamine the installed version number - it will be in the format r400.x, r410.x, or r430.x where x represents the minor versionAffected if The version does not begin with r400, r410, or r430 (this CVE does not apply)
-
Compare against vulnerable r400 rangeIf the version starts with r400, verify the minor version: vulnerable versions are r400 through r400.5 (any version >= r400 but < r400.6)Affected if Installed version is r400.0 through r400.5
-
Compare against vulnerable r410 rangeIf the version starts with r410, verify the minor version: vulnerable versions are r410 through r410.5 (any version >= r410 but < r410.6)Affected if Installed version is r410.0 through r410.5
-
Compare against vulnerable r430 rangeIf the version starts with r430, verify the minor version: vulnerable versions are r430 through r430.1 (any version >= r430 but < r430.2)Affected if Installed version is r430.0 through r430.1
The environment is affected if the installed Experion PKS version falls within any of these vulnerable ranges: r400.0-r400.5, r410.0-r410.5, or r430.0-r430.1.
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 supported versions (R400.6, R410.6, R430.2 or later) as the primary remediation; apply network segmentation and intrusion detection as compensating controls if immediate upgrade is not feasible.
Minimum fixed versions: R400.6, R410.6, or R430.2 (depending on starting version); later versions also contain the fix
- Identify the current Experion PKS (EKPS) version running in the environment
- Determine the appropriate upgrade path based on current version: for r400-r409 upgrade to R400.6, for r410-r429 upgrade to R410.6, for r430-r431 upgrade to R430.2
- Review Honeywell's official upgrade documentation and release notes for the target version
- Perform a complete backup of the EKPS system configuration, databases, and critical data
- Schedule the upgrade during a planned maintenance window with minimal production impact
- Follow Honeywell's documented upgrade procedure to apply the target version (R400.6, R410.6, or R430.2)
- After upgrade, verify all EKPS services are running correctly and validate system functionality
- Confirm the installed version matches the expected fixed release
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation12.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing16.0 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 $16,896.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-9189 — 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-2014-9189 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