CVE-2019-0089
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 · uneditedImproper data sanitization vulnerability in subsystem in Intel(R) SPS before versions SPS_E5_04.00.04.381.0, SPS_E3_04.01.04.054.0, SPS_SoC-A_04.00.04.181.0, and SPS_SoC-X_04.00.04.086.0 may allow a privileged user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.
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 confidenceImproper data sanitization in a subsystem of Intel Server Platform Services (SPS) firmware allows a privileged local user to potentially escalate privileges. The vulnerability affects SPS_E5, SPS_E3, SPS_SoC-A, and SPS_SoC-X versions prior to their respective patched releases.
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< sps_e5_04.00.04.381.0< sps_e3_04.01.04.054.0< sps_soc-a_04.00.04.181.0< sps_soc-x_04.00.04.086.0CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/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 if Intel SPS firmware is presentCheck the server's BMC (Baseboard Management Controller) for Intel Server Platform Services firmware. This can be done via IPMI: `ipmitool -I lanplus -H <bmc_ip> -U admin -P <password> fru print` or check BIOS/UEFI firmware information during boot. SPS firmware typically appears as a separate firmware component from the main BIOS.Affected if Intel SPS firmware is not installed or the system does not have an Intel Server Platform Services module, then this CVE does not apply.
-
Retrieve SPS firmware versionUse IPMI to query the SPS firmware version. Common command: `ipmitool -I lanplus -H <bmc_ip> -U admin -P <password> raw 0x30 0x03 0x00` or check via BMC web interface under Firmware/Software inventory. The output will show a version string such as 04.00.04.xxx or 04.01.04.xxx.Affected if The command fails to return a version or shows no SPS firmware, then SPS may not be present.
-
Compare version for SPS_E5If the SPS firmware is for the E5 platform (check via `ipmitool fru print` or BMC inventory showing 'SPS' or 'Server Platform Services'), compare the full version string against 04.00.04.381.0. Versions like 04.00.04.200, 04.00.03.100, or any version starting with 04.00.04.xxx where the last number is less than 381 are affected.Affected if The installed SPS_E5 version is less than 04.00.04.381.0, the system is vulnerable.
-
Compare version for SPS_E3For SPS_E3 firmware, compare the version string against 04.01.04.054.0. Versions such as 04.01.03.200 or 04.01.04.020 are vulnerable if the last number is less than 054.Affected if The installed SPS_E3 version is less than 04.01.04.054.0, the system is vulnerable.
-
Compare version for SPS_SoC-AFor SPS_SoC-A firmware (System-on-Chip variant A), compare against 04.00.04.181.0. Any version below this threshold is affected.Affected if The installed SPS_SoC-A version is less than 04.00.04.181.0, the system is vulnerable.
-
Compare version for SPS_SoC-XFor SPS_SoC-X firmware (System-on-Chip variant X), compare against 04.00.04.086.0. Any version below this threshold is affected.Affected if The installed SPS_SoC-X version is less than 04.00.04.086.0, the system is vulnerable.
A system is affected if it runs any Intel SPS firmware version (E5, E3, SoC-A, or SoC-X) that is numerically lower than the respective patched release version for that platform.
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 Intel SPS firmware to version SPS_E5_04.00.04.381.0, SPS_E3_04.01.04.054.0, SPS_SoC-A_04.00.04.181.0, SPS_SoC-X_04.00.04.086.0 or later.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-0089 — 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-2019-0089 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