dbcve.org
Esp IdfApplication · Espressif

CVE-2019-15894

MEDIUM · 6.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2019-10-07
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 3.0.9 / 3.1.6 or later.
See remediation →
73/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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
An issue was discovered in Espressif ESP-IDF 2.x, 3.0.x through 3.0.9, 3.1.x through 3.1.6, 3.2.x through 3.2.3, and 3.3.x through 3.3.1. An attacker who uses fault injection to physically disrupt the ESP32 CPU can bypass the Secure Boot digest verification at startup, and boot unverified code from flash. The fault injection attack does not disable the Flash Encryption feature, so if the ESP32 is configured with the recommended combination of Secure Boot and Flash Encryption, then the impact is minimized. If the ESP32 is configured without Flash Encryption then successful fault injection allows arbitrary code execution. To protect devices with Flash Encryption and Secure Boot enabled against this attack, a firmware change must be made to permanently enable Flash Encryption in the field if it is not already permanently enabled.

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

This vulnerability in Espressif ESP-IDF allows an attacker with physical access to use fault injection to disrupt the ESP32 CPU during startup, bypassing Secure Boot digest verification and booting unverified code from flash. While Flash Encryption remains active after the attack, devices configured without Flash Encryption are vulnerable to arbitrary code execution.

MitigationPermanently enable Flash Encryption in the firmware for devices that have Secure Boot enabled but lack permanent Flash Encryption, as this is the recommended combination to mitigate this attack.

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
Esp IdfApplication
Affected:>= 3.0, < 3.0.9> 3.1, < 3.1.6> 3.2, < 3.2.3>= 3.3, < 3.3.1

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
Physical
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:P/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 checks

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

  1. Identify ESP-IDF version used for firmware
    Check the ESP-IDF version by running 'git describe --tags' in the ESP-IDF directory, or check the sdkconfig file for the 'ESP_IDF_VERSION' value, or review project documentation for the IDF version used at build time.
    Affected if The ESP-IDF version is >=3.0 and <3.0.9, or >3.1 and <3.1.6, or >3.2 and <3.2.3, or >=3.3 and <3.3.1.
  2. Verify Secure Boot configuration
    Inspect the sdkconfig file or build configuration for 'CONFIG_SECURE_BOOT_ENABLED=y' or check the menuconfig output for Secure Boot being enabled in the project configuration.
    Affected if Secure Boot is enabled in the firmware configuration.
  3. Verify Flash Encryption configuration
    Inspect the sdkconfig file or build configuration for 'CONFIG_SECURE_FLASH_ENC_ENABLED=y' or check the menuconfig output for Flash Encryption being enabled in the project configuration.
    Affected if Flash Encryption is NOT enabled (CONFIG_SECURE_FLASH_ENC_ENABLED is not set).
  4. Confirm vulnerable combination
    Cross-reference the findings: ESP-IDF version falls within affected range, Secure Boot is enabled, and Flash Encryption is disabled in the firmware build configuration.
    Affected if All three conditions are true: affected ESP-IDF version, Secure Boot enabled, and Flash Encryption disabled.

A device is affected if it was built with an affected ESP-IDF version, has Secure Boot enabled, but does NOT have Flash Encryption enabled.

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 3.0.9 / 3.1.6 / 3.2.3 or later
Fixed in 3.0.93.1.63.2.3
Interim mitigation

Permanently enable Flash Encryption in the firmware for devices that have Secure Boot enabled but lack permanent Flash Encryption, as this is the recommended combination to mitigate this attack.

Fix this in Esp Idf Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation6.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
30.0 hours of engineering $5,280
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,448.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-15894 — 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-2019-15894 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