CVE-2019-17061
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 · uneditedThe Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) stack implementation on Cypress PSoC 4 through 3.62 devices does not properly restrict the BLE Link Layer header and executes certain memory contents upon receiving a packet with a Link Layer ID (LLID) equal to zero. This allows attackers within radio range to cause deadlocks, cause anomalous behavior in the BLE state machine, or trigger a buffer overflow via a crafted BLE Link Layer frame.
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 confidenceThe BLE stack in Cypress PSoC 4 devices (versions up to 3.62) fails to validate the Link Layer header properly, specifically allowing LLID values of zero to trigger execution of arbitrary memory contents. This enables attackers within radio range to cause deadlocks, corrupt BLE state machine behavior, or trigger buffer overflows via specially crafted BLE Link Layer frames.
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<= 3.62CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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 Cypress PSoC 4 BLE deviceConfirm the device uses Cypress PSoC 4 hardware with BLE capability - check device documentation, firmware metadata, or hardware part number markings for PSoC 4 BLE designationAffected if Device is NOT a Cypress PSoC 4 BLE device, skip remaining checks
-
Determine BLE stack versionLocate the BLE stack or firmware version in device firmware/build documentation, bootloader information, or vendor-supplied version strings; compare against affected range <= 3.62Affected if BLE stack version is 3.62 or lower, or version cannot be verified and device is confirmed PSoC 4 BLE
-
Confirm BLE functionality is activeCheck device configuration or runtime status to determine if BLE stack is enabled and capable of receiving Link Layer frames (advertising, connected, or listening mode)Affected if BLE is enabled and the device can receive BLE Link Layer packets from radio range
Device is affected if it is a Cypress PSoC 4 BLE with BLE stack version 3.62 or lower and has BLE functionality enabled, exposing it to radio-range attackers exploiting the LLID validation flaw.
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 the vendor-supplied firmware patch (Cypress PSoC 4 BLE stack version 3.63 or later) to address the improper LLID validation, and verify BLE functionality after updating. Consider network segmentation to limit radio-range attack surface during patching windows.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-17061 — 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-2019-17061 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