CVE-2019-1010009
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 · uneditedDGLogik Inc DGLux Server All Versions is affected by: Insecure Permissions. The impact is: Remote Execution, Credential Leaks. The component is: IoT API. The attack vector is: Any Accessible Server.
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 · moderate confidenceDGLux Server contains insecure permission controls in its IoT API, allowing unauthorized remote attackers to execute commands and access credentials due to insufficient access control enforcement on the API endpoints.
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 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
- 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 if DGLux Server is installedLook for DGLux Server process running on the system, or check for DGLux installation directories and servicesAffected if DGLux Server is present and running on the system
-
Confirm the IoT API is enabledCheck the DGLux Server configuration for IoT API settings or examine if API ports/services are listeningAffected if The IoT API component is enabled and accessible
-
Verify network exposure of the APICheck firewall rules, network bindings, or reverse proxy configuration to determine if the IoT API is reachable from network interfacesAffected if The IoT API is bound to a network interface accessible to untrusted sources
-
Test for unauthenticated API accessSend a request to the IoT API endpoint without providing credentials and observe the responseAffected if The API responds to unauthenticated requests or returns sensitive data
-
Check for role-based access control configurationExamine DGLux Server configuration files or admin settings for role-based access control (RBAC) enforcement on API endpointsAffected if RBAC or permission validation is not configured or is disabled on the IoT API endpoints
If DGLux Server with an enabled IoT API is exposed to the network without proper authentication enforcement, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 dataImplement proper authentication, role-based access controls, and permission validation on all IoT API endpoints; restrict network exposure to only trusted sources.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-1010009 — 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-2019-1010009 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