CVE-2019-1616
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 · uneditedA vulnerability in the Cisco Fabric Services component of Cisco NX-OS Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause a buffer overflow, resulting in a denial of service (DoS) condition. The vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of Cisco Fabric Services packets. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted Cisco Fabric Services packet to an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause a buffer overflow, resulting in process crashes and a DoS condition on the device. MDS 9000 Series Multilayer Switches are affected running software versions prior to 6.2(25), 8.1(1b), 8.3(1). Nexus 3000 Series Switches are affected running software versions prior to 7.0(3)I4(9) and 7.0(3)I7(4). Nexus 3500 Platform Switches are affected running software versions prior to 6.0(2)A8(10) and 7.0(3)I7(4). Nexus 3600 Platform Switches are affected running software versions prior to 7.0(3)F3(5) Nexus 7000 and 7700 Series Switches are affected running software versions prior to 6.2(22) and 8.2(3). Nexus 9000 Series Switches in Standalone NX-OS Mode are affected running software versions prior to 7.0(3)I4(9) and 7.0(3)I7(4). Nexus 9500 R-Series Line Cards and Fabric Modules are affected running software versions prior to 7.0(3)F3(5). UCS 6200, 6300, and 6400 Fabric Interconnects are affected running software versions prior to 3.2(3j) and 4.0(2a).
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 confidenceBuffer overflow vulnerability in Cisco Fabric Services component of NX-OS Software allows unauthenticated remote attackers to send crafted packets that overflow a buffer, causing process crashes and denial of service. The root cause is insufficient validation of Cisco Fabric Services packet data before copying into fixed-length buffers.
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>= 8.2, < 8.3\(1\)>= 7.0\(3\), < 7.0\(3\)i7\(4\)>= 7.0\(3\)i5, < 7.0\(3\)i7\(4\)>= 7.0\(3\)f3, < 7.0\(3\)f3\(3c\)>= 7.2, < 8.2\(3\)>= 7.0\(3\)f1, < 7.0\(3\)f3\(3c\)>= 7.3, < 8.1\(1b\)>= 5.2, < 6.2\(25\)>= 7.0\(3\)i4, < 7.0\(3\)i4\(9\)>= 6.2, < 6.2\(22\)< 6.2\(22\)< 7.0\(3\)i4\(9\)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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/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.
-
Identify NX-OS versionExecute 'show version' on the device CLI and locate the 'NXOS' version line (typically shows as something like 7.0(3)I4(9) or 8.2(1))Affected if The installed version falls within any of these ranges: >=8.2 but <8.3(1); >=7.0(3) but <7.0(3)I7(4); >=7.0(3)I5 but <7.0(3)I7(4); >=7.0(3)F3 but <7.0(3)F3(3c); >=7.2 but <8.2(3); >=7.0(3)F1 but <7.0(3)F3(3c); >=7.3 but <8.1(1b); >=5.2 but <6.2(25); >=7.0(3)I4 but <7.0(3)I4(9); >=6.2 but <6.2(22); o
-
Verify Cisco Fabric Services is enabledRun 'show cfs status' to check if Cisco Fabric Services is enabled on the deviceAffected if The CFS status shows the service as enabled (even if distributed merge is disabled, the process may still be listening)
-
Check if CFS IPv4 or IPv6 is bound to an interfaceRun 'show cfs internal network' or 'show cfs ipv4 status' to see if Fabric Services has an active network bindingAffected if CFS is bound to any IP interface (management or VLANs), indicating the service is reachable over the network
-
Review process crash logs for CFSRun 'show process crashinfo | include cfs' or check 'show logging last 100 | include CFS' for recent crash eventsAffected if Any CFS-related process crashes are observed in the logs, especially unexpected restarts
The device is affected if it runs a vulnerable NX-OS version (from the ranges above) AND Cisco Fabric Services is enabled and network-reachable on the device.
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 data6.27.08.1
Apply vendor-supplied software updates to reach the fixed versions (MDS: 6.2(25)/8.1(1b)/8.3(1), Nexus 3000/9000: 7.0(3)I4(9)/7.0(3)I7(4), Nexus 7000/7700: 6.2(22)/8.2(3), etc.) as listed in the Cisco advisory.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-1616 — 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-2019-1616 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