CVE-2019-10777
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 · uneditedIn aws-lambda versions prior to version 1.0.5, the "config.FunctioName" is used to construct the argument used within the "exec" function without any sanitization. It is possible for a user to inject arbitrary commands to the "zipCmd" used within "config.FunctionName".
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 confidenceThe aws-lambda package versions before 1.0.5 have a command injection vulnerability where the config.FunctionName parameter is used directly in an exec() call without sanitization. An attacker controlling the FunctionName value can inject arbitrary shell commands through the zipCmd construction.
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< 1.0.5CVSS 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:3.1/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 aws-lambda package installationRun 'npm list aws-lambda' in your project directory, or check package.json for 'aws-lambda' in dependenciesAffected if The package is listed as a dependency
-
Determine installed versionCheck the installed version from npm list output or run 'npm list aws-lambda --depth=0' to see the exact version numberAffected if Version is below 1.0.5 (e.g., 1.0.4, 1.0.3, etc.)
-
Locate vulnerable code usageSearch project source code for usage of config.FunctionName or functionName in code that interacts with the aws-lambda package, particularly where it is passed to any command execution functionAffected if Code passes FunctionName configuration to functions that execute system commands
-
Verify external input reachabilityTrace the data flow of the FunctionName parameter in your application to determine if it accepts user-supplied or externally-sourced input that could be controlled by an attackerAffected if Untrusted input can reach the FunctionName configuration value without validation
You are affected if you have aws-lambda version below 1.0.5 installed AND your application uses the FunctionName parameter with values that could be controlled by an attacker.
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.
dbcve · scoped1.0.5
Upgrade to aws-lambda version 1.0.5 or later which implements proper input sanitization/validation on the FunctionName parameter before using it in exec() calls.
1.0.5
- Update the aws-lambda dependency in package.json to version 1.0.5 or higher (e.g., "aws-lambda": ">=1.0.5")
- Run 'npm install' or 'npm update aws-lambda' to install the fixed version
- Verify the installed version is 1.0.5 or later using 'npm list aws-lambda'
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-10777 — 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-2019-10777 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