CVE-2019-12448
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in GNOME gvfs 1.29.4 through 1.41.2. daemon/gvfsbackendadmin.c has race conditions because the admin backend doesn't implement query_info_on_read/write.
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 confidenceThe GNOME gvfs admin backend (gvfsbackendadmin.c) has race conditions due to missing implementation of query_info_on_read and query_info_on_write functions. This allows attackers to exploit timing windows during file operations, potentially leading to inconsistent state or information disclosure.
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>= 1.29.4, <= 1.41.2CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/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.
-
Check if gvfs is installedRun 'rpm -q gvfs' on RHEL/CentOS or 'dpkg -s gvfs' on Debian/Ubuntu. On Flatpak systems, check via 'flatpak list | grep gvfs'.Affected if gvfs package is not found (not installed) or the command fails.
-
Retrieve installed gvfs versionRun 'rpm -qi gvfs | grep Version' on RPM systems, or 'dpkg -s gvfs | grep Version' on Debian systems, or 'gvfsd --version' if available.Affected if The command returns no version output or the package is not found.
-
Compare version against affected rangeCheck if the installed version is >= 1.29.4 and <= 1.41.2. For example, version 1.33.0, 1.38.1, or 1.41.0 would be within the vulnerable range.Affected if Installed version is greater than or equal to 1.29.4 AND less than or equal to 1.41.2.
-
Verify admin backend availabilityCheck if the admin backend module exists: look for 'gvfsbackendadmin.so' or 'gvfsbackendadmin' in standard gvfs lib paths such as /usr/lib/gvfs/ or /usr/libexec/gvfs/.Affected if The admin backend binary or shared object file is present on the system.
-
Check if admin backend is loaded or configuredInspect running processes for 'gvfsd-admin' or check gvfs daemon configuration. Run 'ps aux | grep gvfs' or examine user gvfs mounts under ~/.gvfs/ or /run/user/<uid>/gvfs/.Affected if The admin backend daemon (gvfsd-admin) is running or admin-type mounts are visible.
A system is affected if gvfs is installed with a version between 1.29.4 and 1.41.2 inclusive AND the admin backend module (gvfsbackendadmin) is present and potentially in use.
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 dataUpgrade gvfs to version 1.41.3 or later which includes proper implementation of query_info_on_read/write in the admin backend, or implement the missing functions to serialize file metadata operations.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $6,720.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-12448 — 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-2019-12448 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