CVE-2019-16141
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 the once_cell crate before 1.0.1 for Rust. There is a panic during initialization of Lazy.
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 once_cell crate before version 1.0.1 for Rust contains a vulnerability where a panic occurs during the initialization of the Lazy primitive. This could lead to denial of service in applications relying on lazy initialization.
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>= 0.2.6, < 1.0.1CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Locate the once_cell crate version in your projectSearch your project's Cargo.lock file for the once_cell entry and note the version number listed after 'name = "once_cell"'Affected if The version shown is 0.2.6 or higher but lower than 1.0.1 (for example 0.3.0, 0.4.0, 1.0.0)
-
Check Cargo.toml for direct once_cell dependencyLook in your Cargo.toml file under [dependencies] for any line containing once_cell and check the version specifierAffected if The specified version range includes versions below 1.0.1 (such as "0.2", "0.3", "0.4", ">=0.2.6")
-
Verify your build uses the vulnerable versionRun `cargo tree -p once_cell` to display the exact version of once_cell being used in your current buildAffected if The output shows a version in the range 0.2.6 through 1.0.0
-
Confirm Lazy primitive usage in your codeSearch your source files for imports or usage of `once_cell::sync::Lazy` or `once_cell::unsync::Lazy`Affected if Your code uses the Lazy type and the crate version is vulnerable per steps 1-3
You are affected if the once_cell crate version in your build is 0.2.6 or higher but below 1.0.1 and your code uses the Lazy primitive for lazy initialization.
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 data1.0.1
Upgrade the once_cell crate to version 1.0.1 or later to resolve the initialization panic issue.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,144.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-16141 — 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-2019-16141 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