CVE-2019-0123
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 · uneditedInsufficient memory protection in Intel(R) 6th Generation Core Processors and greater, supporting SGX, 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 confidenceInsufficient memory protection vulnerability in Intel 6th Gen+ processors with SGX (Software Guard Extensions) support allows a privileged local user to potentially escalate privileges. The vulnerability stems from inadequate memory isolation protections within SGX enclaves, enabling a local attacker with existing privileged access to bypass security boundaries.
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 dataall versionsall 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:3.1/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 the CPU modelRun 'wmic cpu get name' on Windows or 'lscpu | grep "Model name"' on Linux to retrieve the processor modelAffected if The displayed model matches any of these: Intel Core I7 6970hq, 6920hq, 6870hq, 6822eq, 6820hq, 6820hk, 6820eq, or 6785r
-
Check if SGX is enabled in BIOS/UEFIEnter the system BIOS/UEFI setup (typically via F2, F12, or Delete key during boot) and navigate to the Security or Processor settings section to view the SGX (Software Guard Extensions) statusAffected if SGX is shown as Enabled or the setting is not grayed out as disabled
-
Check SGX runtime status via operating systemOn Windows, run 'powercfg /list' or check Intel SGX SDK if installed. On Linux, check 'ls /dev/sgx*' or 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' for 'sgx' in flags. Use 'sudo cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/sgx' if availableAffected if SGX device files exist or the CPU indicates SGX support is available/active in the OS
-
Verify firmware versionOn Windows, run 'wmic bios get smbiosbiosversion' or check the Intel Management Engine firmware version via 'wmic /namespace:\\root\wmi path MSAcpi_ThermalZoneTemperature get CurrentTemperature'. On Linux, check 'dmidecode -s bios-version'Affected if The firmware version cannot be confirmed as patched because all versions of the listed CPU firmware are affected
You are affected if your system uses one of the listed Intel Core i7 processor models and SGX is currently enabled in the BIOS or active at the operating system level.
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 processor firmware/microcode updates and BIOS updates from system OEMs. If SGX is not required, consider disabling it at the BIOS level as a compensating control until patches can be applied.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-0123 — 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-2019-0123 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