JenkinsApplication
CVE-2019-10405
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 · uneditedJenkins 2.196 and earlier, LTS 2.176.3 and earlier printed the value of the "Cookie" HTTP request header on the /whoAmI/ URL, allowing attackers exploiting another XSS vulnerability to obtain the HTTP session cookie despite it being marked HttpOnly.
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 confidenceJenkins versions 2.196 and earlier, and LTS 2.176.3 and earlier had a vulnerability where the Cookie HTTP request header value was being printed/reflected on the /whoAmI/ URL endpoint. This allowed attackers who exploited another XSS vulnerability to obtain the HTTP session cookie value, bypassing the HttpOnly protection which normally prevents JavaScript access to cookies.
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
JenkinsApplication
<= 2.176.3<= 2.196CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
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.
-
Check your Jenkins versionNavigate to Manage Jenkins > About Jenkins, or access /api/json?tree=version, or run `java -jar jenkins.war --version`Affected if Version is 2.196 or earlier, or LTS 2.176.3 or earlier
-
Verify /whoAmI endpoint is accessibleMake a GET request to the /whoAmI/ URL endpointAffected if The endpoint returns a response (it is reachable)
-
Inspect Cookie header reflection in /whoAmI responseSend a request with an arbitrary Cookie header (e.g., Cookie: test=value) to /whoAmI/ and check if that value appears in the response bodyAffected if The Cookie header value is reflected/printed in the response
You are affected if your Jenkins version is 2.196 or earlier (or LTS 2.176.3 or earlier) AND the /whoAmI/ endpoint reflects Cookie header values in its response.
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 dataUpgrade Jenkins to version 2.197 or later, or LTS 2.176.4 or later, which contain the fix to stop printing the Cookie header value on the /whoAmI/ endpoint.
Fix this in Jenkins
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-10405 — 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-2019-10405 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