CVE-2018-3612
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 · uneditedIntel NUC kits with insufficient input validation in system firmware, potentially allows a local attacker to elevate privileges to System Management Mode (SMM).
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 confidenceIntel NUC kits contain insufficient input validation in system firmware, allowing a local attacker to escalate privileges to System Management Mode (SMM). This is a firmware-level vulnerability where improper validation of input data enables privilege escalation from OS level to the highest privilege mode in x86 processors.
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= ayaplcel.86a= bnkbl357.86a= ccsklm5v.86a= ccsklm30.86a= dnkbli5v.86a= dnkbli7v.86a= dnkbli30.86a= fybyt10h.86a= gkaplcpx.86a= kyskli70.86a= mkkbli5v.86a= mkkbly35.86aall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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 Intel NUC modelCheck the physical device label on the chassis or use system information tools (dmidecode -s system-product-name on Linux, wmic baseboard get product on Windows, or System Information in Windows)Affected if The system is an Intel NUC kit
-
Retrieve current BIOS firmware versionRun dmidecode -s bios-version on Linux, wmic bios get smbiosbiosversion on Windows, or check the BIOS version displayed at boot in the setup screenAffected if A BIOS version string is returned
-
Match BIOS version against affected identifiersCompare the obtained BIOS version string (e.g., ayaplcel.86a, bnkbl357.86a, etc.) against the list: ayaplcel.86a, bnkbl357.86a, ccsklm5v.86a, ccsklm30.86a, dnkbli5v.86a, dnkbli7v.86a, dnkbli30.86a, fybyt10h.86a, gkaplcpx.86a, kyskli70.86a, mkkbli5v.86a, mkkbly35.86aAffected if The installed BIOS version exactly matches one of the affected version identifiers listed for this CVE
-
Confirm firmware-level attack surfaceVerify that SMM (System Management Mode) is enabled and accessible from the operating system; this is the default state on Intel NUC systemsAffected if SMM is enabled (default configuration) and the BIOS version matches an affected identifier
A system is affected if it is an Intel NUC kit running a BIOS version that matches one of the specific identifiers listed in the affected products, with SMM in its default enabled state.
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 Intel-released firmware updates for affected NUC kits; verify the firmware update comes from an official Intel source before applying.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-3612 — 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-2018-3612 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