CVE-2019-16671
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 on Weidmueller IE-SW-VL05M 3.6.6 Build 16102415, IE-SW-VL08MT 3.5.2 Build 16102415, and IE-SW-PL10M 3.3.16 Build 16102416 devices. Remote authenticated users can crash a device with a special packet because of Uncontrolled Resource Consumption.
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 confidenceThis vulnerability in Weidmueller industrial Ethernet switches (IE-SW-VL05M, IE-SW-VL08MT, IE-SW-PL10M) allows remote authenticated users to crash the device by sending a specially crafted packet. The issue stems from uncontrolled resource consumption (CWE-400) in packet handling, where the device fails to properly validate or limit resource allocation when processing the malicious packet, leading to a denial of service.
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<= 3.3.4<= 3.3.4<= 3.4.4<= 3.4.4<= 3.4.4<= 3.4.4<= 3.4.4<= 3.4.4CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 the switch modelAccess the device web interface, CLI, or management console and record the exact model number (e.g., IE-SW-PL09M, IE-SW-PL18MT)Affected if The model matches one of: IE-SW-PL09M, IE-SW-PL09MT, IE-SW-PL18M, IE-SW-PL18MT, or variants with 2gc14tx2sc/2st suffixes
-
Check the installed firmware versionNavigate to the device status or system information page in the web interface or run 'show version' in CLI; record the firmware version numberAffected if Firmware version is 3.3.4 or lower for PL09M/PL09MT models, or 3.4.4 or lower for PL18M/PL18MT variants
-
Verify remote management access statusCheck the device network settings to confirm whether remote management (HTTP/HTTPS/Telnet/SSH) is enabled on WAN or external interfacesAffected if Remote management is enabled and the device management interface is reachable from untrusted networks
-
Confirm authentication method configurationReview the device security or authentication settings to determine if local accounts or remote authentication (RADIUS/TACACS+) are configured for switch accessAffected if User authentication is enabled, allowing authenticated users to send packets to the device
The device is affected if it is a listed model running firmware at or below the specified version threshold and is accessible to authenticated remote users on untrusted networks.
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 dataApply vendor firmware updates when available; until then, restrict network access to only trusted authenticated users and implement network segmentation to limit exposure to this DoS vector.
- 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-2019-16671 — 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-2019-16671 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