CVE-2019-11653
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 · uneditedRemote Access Control Bypass in Micro Focus Content Manager. versions 9.1, 9.2, 9.3. The vulnerability could be exploited to manipulate data stored during another user’s CheckIn request.
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 confidenceThis is an access control bypass vulnerability in Micro Focus Content Manager where an authenticated attacker can manipulate data stored during another user's CheckIn request. The flaw allows unauthorized modification of data belonging to concurrent user sessions, effectively bypassing session-level access controls.
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= 9.1.0= 9.2.0= 9.3.0CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/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.
-
Identify the installed Content Manager versionCheck the product version through the About dialog in the Content Manager client, or inspect the registry key (HKLM\SOFTWARE\Micro Focus\Content Manager) on the server, or run: dmcli -version from the bin directoryAffected if The installed version matches exactly 9.1.0, 9.2.0, or 9.3.0
-
Verify CheckIn functionality is activeConfirm the CheckIn/CheckOut module is in use by reviewing the Content Manager system configuration or checking user activity logs for recent CheckIn operationsAffected if CheckIn operations are being performed by users in the environment
-
Review concurrent session configurationExamine the Content Manager server configuration for concurrent session handling settings. Check the dm.ini or server configuration files for session management parametersAffected if Multiple users can authenticate and perform CheckIn operations simultaneously without additional session isolation controls
-
Inspect audit logs for session anomaliesSearch Content Manager audit logs for concurrent CheckIn requests from different users occurring within the same time window, especially where session IDs may overlap or data ownership appears inconsistentAffected if Audit logs show concurrent CheckIn operations where data ownership or session attribution appears abnormal
A user is affected if they are running an unpatched Content Manager version 9.1.0, 9.2.0, or 9.3.0 where CheckIn operations are performed by concurrent authenticated sessions.
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 the vendor-supplied patch or upgrade to a patched version of Micro Focus Content Manager. Review concurrent session handling and implement additional validation on CheckIn operations to ensure data integrity.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $4,096.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-11653 — 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-2019-11653 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