CVE-2019-12128
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 SO 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 confidenceONAP Service Orchestrator (SO) through Dublin has multiple exposed ports (30234, 30290, 32010, 30270, 30224, 30281, 30254, 30285, 30271) that provide direct, unauthenticated access to sensitive ONAP services. An attacker connecting to these ports gains full administrative control over affected services without any credentials.
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.
-
Identify ONAP Service Orchestrator installation and versionLocate the ONAP SO component in your environment and determine its installed version. Check deployment manifests, container images, or running services for version information (e.g., look for version tags like 3.x or 4.x).Affected if The installed version falls within >= 3.0.0 and <= 4.0.0
-
Enumerate listening network ports on ONAP SO hostsUse netstat, ss, or similar network tools to list all listening ports on the servers running ONAP SO components. Focus on identifying whether ports 30234, 30290, 32010, 30270, 30224, 30281, 30254, 30285, or 30271 are in a LISTEN state.Affected if Any of the nine specific ports (30234, 30290, 32010, 30270, 30224, 30281, 30254, 30285, 30271) are open and listening
-
Verify port accessibility from untrusted networksDetermine whether these ports are accessible from network segments that are not trusted or are externally exposed. Check firewall rules, security groups, or network ACLs that govern access to the ONAP SO hosts. Attempt to connect to these ports from an untrusted network location or verify that no firewall rule blocks unauthorized access.Affected if The vulnerable ports are reachable from untrusted or external network segments without authentication requirements
You are affected if ONAP SO version 3.0.0 through 4.0.0 is installed AND any of the nine specific ports are exposed and accessible without authentication on your network.
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 dataRestrict access to the vulnerable ports via firewall rules or network segmentation, and enable authentication on the exposed ONAP services. If these ports are not required for operations, disable them entirely.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-12128 — 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-2019-12128 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