CVE-2014-9209
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 · uneditedUntrusted search path vulnerability in the Clean Utility application in Rockwell Automation FactoryTalk Services Platform before 2.71.00 and FactoryTalk View Studio 8.00.00 and earlier allows local users to gain privileges via a Trojan horse DLL in an unspecified directory.
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 confidenceUntrusted search path (DLL hijacking) vulnerability in the Clean Utility of Rockwell Automation FactoryTalk Services Platform and FactoryTalk View Studio allows local attackers to execute arbitrary code by placing a malicious DLL in an unspecified directory that the application searches when loading libraries.
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<= 2.70.00<= 8.00.00CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:M/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.
-
Check if FactoryTalk Services Platform is installedOpen Windows Add or Remove Programs (or Settings > Apps & features) and look for 'FactoryTalk Services Platform' or check the installation directory for the Clean Utility executable. Note the installed version.Affected if The version displayed is 2.70.00 or earlier (vulnerable to DLL hijacking)
-
Check if FactoryTalk View Studio is installedOpen Windows Add or Remove Programs and look for 'FactoryTalk View Studio' or locate the Clean Utility in the installation folder. Note the installed version.Affected if The version displayed is 8.00.00 or earlier (vulnerable to DLL hijacking)
-
Locate the Clean Utility executableSearch for files named 'Clean.exe' or similar in the FactoryTalk installation directories (commonly under C:\Program Files\Rockwell Software or C:\Program Files (x86)\Rockwell Software).Affected if The Clean Utility exists in versions 2.70.00 or earlier for FactoryTalk Services Platform, or 8.00.00 or earlier for FactoryTalk View Studio
-
Verify the DLL search path vulnerabilityExamine directories in the application path where the Clean Utility runs. Check if any directory in the DLL search order is writable by non-admin users (the attacker would place a malicious DLL here).Affected if A writable directory exists in the DLL search path that could be exploited for DLL hijacking
If either FactoryTalk Services Platform version 2.70.00/earlier or FactoryTalk View Studio version 8.00.00/earlier is installed and the Clean Utility is accessible, the environment is vulnerable to DLL hijacking via untrusted search paths.
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 dataUpdate to FactoryTalk Services Platform 2.71.00 or later, or FactoryTalk View Studio 8.00.00 or later. Additionally, restrict write access to directories in the DLL search path to prevent untrusted DLL injection.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,928.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-9209 — 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-2014-9209 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