CVE-2019-1010100
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 · uneditedAkeo Consulting Rufus 3.0 and earlier is affected by: DLL search order hijacking. The impact is: Arbitrary code execution WITH escalation of privilege. The component is: Executable installers, portable executables (ALL executables on the web site). The attack vector is: CAPEC-471, CWE-426, CWE-427.
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 confidenceAkeo Consulting Rufus versions 3.0 and earlier are vulnerable to DLL search order hijacking, allowing attackers to place malicious DLLs in locations searched before legitimate DLLs. This enables arbitrary code execution with potential privilege escalation, likely because the installer runs with elevated privileges or the DLL loading occurs in a privileged context.
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<= 3.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Locate Rufus installationSearch system for rufus.exe file - typically found in Program Files, Program Files (x86), or user-downloaded portable locationsAffected if Rufus executable exists on the system
-
Determine installed versionRight-click rufus.exe, select Properties, view File Version field on Details tab; or use PowerShell: (Get-Item 'path\to\rufus.exe').VersionInfo.FileVersionAffected if Version displays as 3.0 or lower (for example 3.0, 2.20, 2.19)
-
Check executable directory permissionsRight-click the folder containing rufus.exe, go to Security tab, check which users have Write or Modify permissionsAffected if Non-admin users can write files to the directory where rufus.exe resides
-
Inspect for suspicious DLLs in application folderOpen the folder containing rufus.exe, look for DLL files that should not be there (check file names against legitimate Rufus DLLs if known)Affected if Unexpected DLL files exist in the same folder as rufus.exe, especially if they were placed by an attacker
User is affected if Rufus version 3.0 or earlier is installed and the application directory or launch location is writable by untrusted users, allowing DLL search order hijacking to execute arbitrary code.
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 Rufus to a version newer than 3.0 which should contain the fix for DLL search order hijacking. Alternatively, ensure the application uses secure DLL loading practices (absolute paths, Safe DLL Search Mode disabled for privileged processes).
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-1010100 — 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-2019-1010100 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