CVE-2019-13418
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 · uneditedSearch Guard versions before 24.0 had an issue that values of string arrays in documents are not properly anonymized.
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 confidenceSearch Guard versions before 24.0 fail to properly anonymize string array values in Elasticsearch documents. This allows sensitive data within array fields to be exposed rather than masked as intended by the anonymization feature.
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< 24.0CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Determine Search Guard versionCheck the installed Search Guard version by querying the Search Guard plugin endpoint, reviewing the Search Guard JAR file in the Elasticsearch plugins directory, or checking your package manager/dependency list for the Search Guard versionAffected if The installed version is lower than 24.0 (e.g., 23.x, 22.x, etc.)
-
Identify anonymization configurationReview Search Guard configuration files (typically in elasticsearch.yml or dedicated Search Guard configuration) for any 'anonymization' or 'mask' settings that define fields to be anonymizedAffected if Anonymization rules are configured in Search Guard settings
-
Check for string array fields in indicesQuery your Elasticsearch indices to identify fields containing string array data types using the _mapping API: GET /<index>/_mappingAffected if Indices contain fields with string array values (keyword arrays or text arrays) that are targeted by anonymization rules
-
Verify anonymization behavior on array fieldsPerform a test search using Search Guard with a user account that should see masked data. Query documents containing the configured anonymized fields and examine if array values are properly masked or exposed in plain textAffected if String array values are returned in plain text instead of being masked when the anonymization feature is active
You are affected if Search Guard version is below 24.0 AND you have anonymization rules configured that target string array fields in your Elasticsearch indices.
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 data24.0
Upgrade Search Guard to version 24.0 or later to resolve the anonymization bypass for string array fields.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-13418 — 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-2019-13418 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