dbcve.org
SatelliteApplication · Redhat

CVE-2019-11775

HIGH · 7.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2019-07-30
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 0.15.0 or later.
See remediation →
83/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
All builds of Eclipse OpenJ9 prior to 0.15 contain a bug where the loop versioner may fail to privatize a value that is pulled out of the loop by versioning - for example if there is a condition that is moved out of the loop that reads a field we may not privatize the value of that field in the modified copy of the loop allowing the test to see one value of the field and subsequently the loop to see a modified field value without retesting the condition moved out of the loop. This can lead to a variety of different issues but read out of array bounds is one major consequence of these problems.

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 confidence

A bug in Eclipse OpenJ9's loop versioner optimization fails to properly privatize values that are pulled out of loops during versioning. When a condition reading a field is moved out of the loop, the field value may not be privatized in the modified loop copy, allowing the loop to observe modified field values without retesting the condition - leading to out-of-bounds array reads.

MitigationUpgrade Eclipse OpenJ9 to version 0.15 or later to receive the loop versioner fix.

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
SatelliteApplication
Affected:= 5.8
Enterprise Linux DesktopOperating system
Affected:= 6.0= 7.0
Enterprise Linux ServerOperating system
Affected:= 6.0= 7.0
Enterprise Linux WorkstationOperating system
Affected:= 6.0= 7.0
Openj9Application
Affected:< 0.15.0

CVSS 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
High
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify the JVM implementation
    Run 'java -version' and examine the output. Look for 'Eclipse OpenJ9' or 'OpenJ9' in the vendor information line.
    Affected if The output shows Eclipse OpenJ9 as the JVM vendor
  2. Check the OpenJ9 version
    Run 'java -version' and look for the version number in the format shown (e.g., 'openj9-0.14.0' or 'build info' line). Alternatively, check the installed package version using 'rpm -q' on Red Hat systems or examine the JAR file version in the JVM installation directory.
    Affected if The version number is lower than 0.15.0 (for example, 0.14.0, 0.13.0, etc.)
  3. Verify JIT compilation is active
    The loop versioner is a JIT compiler optimization. By default, OpenJ9 uses JIT compilation for hot code paths. Check for JIT activity in logs or by examining if the application runs long enough to trigger JIT compilation. This is typically automatic and enabled by default.
    Affected if JIT compilation is enabled (default state) - the vulnerability applies to any code that gets JIT compiled in affected versions

You are affected if you are running Eclipse OpenJ9 version 0.14.0 or earlier with JIT compilation enabled (the default), as the loop versioner optimization can cause out-of-bounds array reads.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Upgrade available Upgrade to 0.15.0 or later
Fixed in 0.15.0
Interim mitigation

Upgrade Eclipse OpenJ9 to version 0.15 or later to receive the loop versioner fix.

Fix this in Satellite Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing16.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
32.0 hours of engineering $5,360
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,576.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-11775 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2019-11775 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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