CVE-2019-12127
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 ONAP OOM through Dublin, by accessing an applicable port (30234, 30290, 32010, 30270, 30224, 30281, 30254, 30285, and/or 30271), an attacker gains full access to the respective ONAP services without any authentication. All ONAP Operations Manager (OOM) setups are affected.
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 confidenceMultiple ONAP OOM services on ports 30234, 30290, 32010, 30270, 30224, 30281, 30254, 30285, and 30271 expose full administrative access without any authentication requirement, allowing complete compromise of affected services.
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>= 3.0.0, < 4.0.0CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Confirm ONAP deployment existsSearch for ONAP OOM (ONAP Operations Manager) components in your environment using 'kubectl get pods -A | grep -i onap' or check for ONAP-related namespaces and servicesAffected if ONAP OOM services are deployed in the environment
-
Identify installed ONAP versionRun 'helm list -a' or check the ONAP Helm charts version using 'helm repo update && helm search onap' and compare to the deployed version. Alternatively, check the ONAP deployment manifest for the version fieldAffected if The installed version is >= 3.0.0 and < 4.0.0
-
Check for exposed administrative portsRun 'netstat -tlnp' or 'ss -tlnp' and look for listening services on ports 30234, 30290, 32010, 30270, 30224, 30281, 30254, 30285, or 30271. Also verify with 'kubectl get svc -A' to see if these ports are exposed via Kubernetes servicesAffected if Any of the ports 30234, 30290, 32010, 30270, 30224, 30281, 30254, 30285, or 30271 are listening and externally accessible
-
Verify authentication is enforced on affected servicesAttempt a curl request to one of the exposed ports (e.g., 'curl http://<host>:<port>/api/') without providing credentials to test if administrative access is granted without authenticationAffected if Administrative access or API responses are returned without requiring any authentication credentials
Your environment is affected if ONAP version 3.0.0 through 3.x.x is installed and any of the administrative ports (30234, 30290, 32010, 30270, 30224, 30281, 30254, 30285, 30271) are exposed without authentication enforcement.
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 · scoped4.0.0
Implement authentication on exposed service ports and apply network policies to restrict access to authorized users and systems only.
ONAP OOM 4.0.0 or later release
- 1. Review ONAP OOM upgrade documentation for your current version
- 2. Create a complete backup of your current ONAP OOM deployment and configuration
- 3. Update your Helm repositories to access ONAP OOM 4.0.0 or later
- 4. Update your ONAP OOM deployment configuration to use the new version
- 5. Run helm upgrade command to apply the new version (e.g., helm upgrade <release-name> onap/oom --version <new-version>)
- 6. Verify all ONAP services start successfully post-upgrade
- 7. Test that the previously vulnerable ports (30234, 30290, 32010, 30270, 30224, 30281, 30254, 30285, 30271) now require authentication
- 8. Validate critical ONAP operations manager functionalities are operational
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $14,080.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-12127 — 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-2019-12127 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