CVE-2015-5626
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 · uneditedStack-based buffer overflow in Yokogawa CENTUM CS 1000 R3.08.70 and earlier, CENTUM CS 3000 R3.09.50 and earlier, CENTUM CS 3000 Entry R3.09.50 and earlier, CENTUM VP R5.04.20 and earlier, CENTUM VP Entry R5.04.20 and earlier, ProSafe-RS R3.02.10 and earlier, Exaopc R3.72.00 and earlier, Exaquantum R2.85.00 and earlier, Exaquantum/Batch R2.50.30 and earlier, Exapilot R3.96.10 and earlier, Exaplog R3.40.00 and earlier, Exasmoc R4.03.20 and earlier, Exarqe R4.03.20 and earlier, Field Wireless Device OPC Server R2.01.02 and earlier, PRM R3.12.00 and earlier, STARDOM VDS R7.30.01 and earlier, STARDOM OPC Server for Windows R3.40 and earlier, FAST/TOOLS R10.01 and earlier, B/M9000CS R5.05.01 and earlier, B/M9000 VP R7.03.04 and earlier, and FieldMate R1.01 or R1.02 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (network-communications outage) via a crafted packet.
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 in Yokogawa CENTUM and related industrial control software allows remote attackers to cause denial of service (network-communications outage) by sending crafted packets to affected systems.
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<= r3.08.70<= r3.09.50<= r3.09.50<= r5.04.20<= r5.04.20<= r3.02.10<= r3.72.00<= r3.96.10CVSS 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:3.1/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.
-
Identify installed Yokogawa productsReview system inventory or check the installed software on the engineering workstation, HMI server, or control processor for Yokogawa CENTUM, Prosafe, Exaopc, or Exapilot componentsAffected if Any of the eight affected products are present on the network
-
Check CENTUM CS 1000 firmware versionAccess the control processor or engineering station and retrieve the firmware version information (typically via system diagnostics, firmware update utility, or version info in the system configuration)Affected if Firmware version is r3.08.70 or earlier (r3.08.70 and below)
-
Check CENTUM CS 3000 or CS 3000 Entry firmware versionAccess the control processor or engineering station and retrieve the firmware version informationAffected if Firmware version is r3.09.50 or earlier (r3.09.50 and below)
-
Check CENTUM VP or VP Entry firmware versionAccess the control processor or engineering station and retrieve the firmware version informationAffected if Firmware version is r5.04.20 or earlier (r5.04.20 and below)
-
Check Prosafe RS firmware versionAccess the safety controller or engineering station and retrieve the firmware version informationAffected if Firmware version is r3.02.10 or earlier (r3.02.10 and below)
-
Check Exaopc or Exapilot software versionCheck the installed software version via the application properties, about dialog, or installed programs list on the host systemAffected if Exaopc version is r3.72.00 or earlier, or Exapilot version is r3.96.10 or earlier
The environment is affected if any Yokogawa CENTUM, Prosafe RS, Exaopc, or Exapilot installation matches the affected version ranges and the network communications feature is enabled, allowing external packets to reach the vulnerable component.
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 dataApply vendor patches to upgrade to fixed versions; implement network segmentation and access controls to limit exposure of ICS components to untrusted networks as interim measures.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 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 $8,256.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-5626 — 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-2015-5626 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