CVE-2018-19282
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 · uneditedRockwell Automation PowerFlex 525 AC Drives 5.001 and earlier allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service by crashing the Common Industrial Protocol (CIP) network stack. The vulnerability allows the attacker to crash the CIP in a way that it does not accept new connections, but keeps the current connections active, which can prevent legitimate users from recovering control.
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 confidenceRockwell Automation PowerFlex 525 AC Drives versions 5.001 and earlier contain a denial of service vulnerability in the Common Industrial Protocol (CIP) network stack. Remote unauthenticated attackers can send specially crafted requests that crash the CIP stack in a way that it stops accepting new connections while maintaining existing connections, effectively locking out legitimate users and preventing recovery of normal service.
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<= 5.001CVSS 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.
-
Identify the device modelLocate the PowerFlex 525 AC Drive in your asset inventory or physically inspect the device nameplate or network configuration for model number confirmationAffected if The device is not a Rockwell Automation PowerFlex 525 AC Drive
-
Check the firmware versionAccess the device web interface, RSLogix/Studio 5000 project, or use the device's built-in web server or management interface to retrieve the installed firmware versionAffected if The firmware version is 5.001 or earlier
-
Confirm CIP protocol is enabledVerify through the device network configuration settings or controller organizer in RSLogix/Studio 5000 that Common Industrial Protocol (CIP) communication is enabled on the deviceAffected if CIP is enabled and the device is communicating over Ethernet/IP
-
Assess network accessibilityReview firewall rules, network segmentation, and ACLs to determine if the device is reachable from untrusted network segments or the internetAffected if The device is directly accessible from untrusted networks without firewall protection
You are affected if you have a PowerFlex 525 AC Drive running firmware version 5.001 or earlier with CIP enabled and accessible from an untrusted network.
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 dataIf a vendor patch is available, update PowerFlex 525 firmware to a version newer than 5.001. If no patch exists, implement network segmentation to isolate the affected devices behind a firewall, and deploy compensating controls such as CIP security conformance and access control lists to limit exposure to untrusted networks.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-19282 — 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-2018-19282 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